History
  • No items yet
midpage
Nash v. Lerner
157 N.J. 535
| N.J. | 1999
|
Check Treatment

Lead Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Rodriguez, reported at 311 N.J.Super. 183, 193, 709 A.2d 799 (1998).

Justice POLLOCK has filed a separate dissenting opinion.






Dissenting Opinion

POLLOCK, J.,

dissenting.

I would affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division, substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Shebell’s majority opinion, reported at 311 N.J.Super. 183, 709 A.2d 799 (1998).

For reversal — Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices HANDLER, O’HERN, GARIBALDI, STEIN, and COLEMAN — 6.

For affirmance — Justice POLLOCK — 1.

Case Details

Case Name: Nash v. Lerner
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Mar 17, 1999
Citation: 157 N.J. 535
Court Abbreviation: N.J.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.