History
  • No items yet
midpage
Vedutis v. SO. PLAINFIELD BD. OF ED.
142 N.J. Super. 492
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 1976
|
Check Treatment
142 N.J. Super. 492 (1976)
362 A.2d 51

DONNA VEDUTIS, AN INFANT BY HER GUARDIAN AD LITEM, ROBERT VEDUTIS AND ROBERT VEDUTIS, INDIVIDUALLY, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
SOUTH PLAINFIELD BOARD OF EDUCATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Submitted June 7, 1976.
Decided June 15, 1976.

*493 Before Judges KOLE, ARD and E. GAULKIN.

Mr. Robert F. Colquhoun, attorney for the appellant.

Messrs. Mulligan & Altman, attorneys for the respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Law Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth in the opinion of Judge Demos, which was approved in Rost v. Fair Lawn Bd. of Ed., 137 N.J. Super. 76 (App. Div. 1975).

In view of our disposition of the matter, we need not consider the issue of informal or substantial compliance which was also raised on this appeal.

Affirmed.

Case Details

Case Name: Vedutis v. SO. PLAINFIELD BD. OF ED.
Court Name: New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Date Published: Jun 15, 1976
Citation: 142 N.J. Super. 492
Court Abbreviation: N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.
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.