Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Judges

EDWARD B. MC KEE AND BARBARA MC KEE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. HARRIS-SEYBOLD COMPANY, DIVISION OF HARRIS-INTERTYPE CORP., SEYBOLD MACHINE CO., CARL W. HAGMAN, DEFENDANTS, MIEHLEGOSS-DEXTER, INC., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

PER CURIAM.

The trial judge's rulings from which defendant appeals not having been shown to be prejudicial and a review of the record disclosing neither prejudice nor error as alleged by appellant in the court's comments during trial, the judgment in favor of plaintiffs is affirmed.

Plaintiffs also urge that under the recently adopted R. 4:42-11(b) (effective January 31, 1972) interest should be allowed on the amounts of the judgment from February 5, 1969, the date of the institution of the action. We hold this rule does not apply retroactively to judgments entered prior to its effective date.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MC KEE v. HARRIS-SEYBOLD CO
(Mar 8, 1972)