LENA v. ENSLEY, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Gerald S. Gordon argued the cause for appellant ( Messrs. Pincus, Sheehan Hendricks, attorneys). Mr. Henry H. Rubenson argued the cause for respondents.

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

LENA v. ENSLEY

Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Dec 18, 1972

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Gerald S. Gordon argued the cause for appellant ( Messrs. Pincus, Sheehan Hendricks, attorneys). Mr. Henry H. Rubenson argued the cause for respondents.

Judges

PER CURIAM.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

CARMELA LENA, ADMINISTRATIX OF THE ESTATE OF FAUST LENA AND ADMINISTRATIXAD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF FAUST LENA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CLARENCE ENSLEY, ANTHONY DiPIETRO, NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, GIORDANOAND MOLAR TRUCKING CO., INC., A CORPORATION OF NEW JERSEY,DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

PER CURIAM.

This matter comes to us as of right because of dissent in the Appellate Division. The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed substantially for reasons expressed in the majority opinion.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB, Justices JACOBS, HALL and MOUNTAIN, and Judges CONFORD, SULLIVAN and LEWIS — 7.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

LENA v. ENSLEY

CARMELA LENA, ADMINISTRATIX OF THE ESTATE OF FAUST LENA AND ADMINISTRATIXAD PROSEQUENDUM OF THE ESTATE OF FAUST LENA, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CLARENCE ENSLEY, ANTHONY DiPIETRO, NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY, GIORDANOAND MOLAR TRUCKING CO., INC., A CORPORATION OF NEW JERSEY,DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Comments