DODD v. COPELAND, ET AL, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Bruce D. Herrigel argued the cause for appellants, cross-respondents (
Herrigel
Herrigel, attorneys). Mr. John J. Trombadore argued the cause for plaintiffs-respondents, cross-appellants (
Trombadore
Trombadore, attorneys).

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

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Bruce D. Herrigel argued the cause for appellants, cross-respondents (
Herrigel
Herrigel, attorneys). Mr. John J. Trombadore argued the cause for plaintiffs-respondents, cross-appellants (
Trombadore
Trombadore, attorneys).

Judges

See more information ...

Smart Summary

WILLIAM DODD, EDWARD DODD, AND MARION ELIZABETH DODD,PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, CROSS-APPELLANTS, v. GEORGE R. COPELAND, GEORGE D.COPELAND, AND SAMUEL J. COX, DEFENDANTS, SAMUEL J. COX AND UNSATISFIED CLAIMAND JUDGMENT FUND, APPELLANTS, CROSS-RESPONDENTS.

The opinion of the court was delivered PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed for the reasons given in the majority opinion, 99 N.J. Super. 481 (1968).

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN — 7.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.