MAYFLOWER INDUSTRIES v. THOR CORP, N.J., Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Mr. Meyer E. Ruback argued the cause for the appellant ( Messrs. Ruback, Albach Weisman and Mr. Alfred C. Clapp, attorneys). Mr. Thomas J. Brogan argued the cause for the respondent Thor Corporation. Mr. Sol D. Kapelsohn argued the cause for the respondent Teldisco, Inc. ( Messrs. Kapelsohn, Lerner, Leuchter Reitman, 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. Meyer E. Ruback argued the cause for the appellant ( Messrs. Ruback, Albach Weisman and Mr. Alfred C. Clapp, attorneys). Mr. Thomas J. Brogan argued the cause for the respondent Thor Corporation. Mr. Sol D. Kapelsohn argued the cause for the respondent Teldisco, Inc. ( Messrs. Kapelsohn, Lerner, Leuchter Reitman, attorneys).

Judges

See more information ...

Smart Summary

MAYFLOWER INDUSTRIES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. THOR CORPORATION, AN ILLINOISCORPORATION, AND TELDISCO, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION,DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

PER CURIAM.

The orders will be affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinions of Judge Francis in the court below.

For affirmance — Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices OLIPHANT, WACHENFELD, BURLING, JACOBS and BRENNAN — 6.

For reversal — None.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.