IN RE APPLICATION OF FISHER, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Stephen B. Wiley argued the cause for applicants-appellants ( Messrs. Meyner Wiley, attorneys). Mr. David J. Goldberg, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for defendant-respondent ( Mr. Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney). Mr. Harold H. Fisher argued the cause for interveners-defendants-respondents ( Messrs. Shanley Fisher, attorneys; Mr. John Kandravy, on the brief).

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. Stephen B. Wiley argued the cause for applicants-appellants ( Messrs. Meyner Wiley, attorneys). Mr. David J. Goldberg, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for defendant-respondent ( Mr. Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney). Mr. Harold H. Fisher argued the cause for interveners-defendants-respondents ( Messrs. Shanley Fisher, attorneys; Mr. John Kandravy, on the brief).

Judges

See more information ...

Smart Summary

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF EDWIN FISHER AND HARRY SZKOLAR,APPLICANTS, FOR AN ORDER ADJUDICATING CHAPTER 152 OF THE LAWS OF 1962 TO BENULL AND VOID IN ACCORDANCE WITH REVISED STATUTES OF NEW JERSEY 1:7-4 ASAMENDED.EDWIN FISHER AND HARRY SZKOLAR, APPLICANTS-APPELLANTS, v. ARTHUR J. SILLS,ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND HERMAN ADES ANDABE STERN, ETC., ET ALS., INTERVENERS-DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion by Judge Gaulkin in the Appellate Division. 80 N.J. Super. 523 (1963).

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.