SCHRAMM v. ARSENAL ESSO, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Advocates

Mr. Herbert Klein argued the cause for appellant Krauszer's Vending, Inc. ( Messrs. Krieger and Klein, attorneys; Mr. William J. Pollinger on the brief). Mr. Philip M. Lustbader argued the cause for respondent Arsenal Esso Station. ( Philip M. Lustbader, David Lustbader, a Professional Corporation, attorneys).

Judges

PER CURIAM.

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Advocates

Mr. Herbert Klein argued the cause for appellant Krauszer's Vending, Inc. ( Messrs. Krieger and Klein, attorneys; Mr. William J. Pollinger on the brief). Mr. Philip M. Lustbader argued the cause for respondent Arsenal Esso Station. ( Philip M. Lustbader, David Lustbader, a Professional Corporation, attorneys).

Judges

PER CURIAM.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

BERTHA SCHRAMM AND GEORGE SCHRAMM, PLAINTIFFS'-RESPONDENTS, v. ARSENAL ESSOSTATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND KRAUSZER'S VENDING, INC.,DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantally for the reasons expressed by the Appellate Division. Schramm v. Arsenal Esso Station and Krauszer's Vending, Inc., reported at 124 N.J. Super. 135 (App.Div. 1973).

For affirmance — Justices JACOBS, HALL, SULLIVAN, PASHMAN and CLIFFORD and Judge CONFORD — 6.

Opposed — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

SCHRAMM v. ARSENAL ESSO

BERTHA SCHRAMM AND GEORGE SCHRAMM, PLAINTIFFS'-RESPONDENTS, v. ARSENAL ESSOSTATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND KRAUSZER'S VENDING, INC.,DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Comments