182 A.2d 164 (N.J.Super.A.D. 1962), A--485, Hanover Ins. Co. v. Franke

Citation: 182 A.2d 164, 75 N.J.Super. 68

Opinion Judge: [9] Foley

Party Name: The HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, a corporation, and the Township of Delaware, a municipal corporation, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Jack N. FRANKE and Rose Franke, his wife, James A. Butler, Defendants, and Martin Roth and Rae Roth, his wife, Defendants-Appellants.

Attorney: [6] Mr. Milford J. Meyer (of the Pennsylvania Bar) argued the cause for appellants pro hac vice (Mr. Thomas W. Rauffenbart, attorney; Messrs. Meyer, Lasch, Hankin & Poul, of the Pennsylvania Bar, of counsel).

Case Date: Wednesday June 06, 1962

Court: New Jersey Superior Court

Linked as:

Document options

Printable page
Email this

Extract

182 A.2d 164 (N.J.Super.A.D. 1962), A--485, Hanover Ins. Co. v. Franke

No longer available (Autolink)

See the full content of this document

This document cites

New Jersey - 165 A. 868 (N.J. 1933), 430, Nicholas v. Independence Indemnity Company
New Jersey - 197 A. 29 (N.J.L. 1938), 77, Penza v. Century Indemnity Company of Hartford
New Jersey - 157 A.2d 853 (N.J.Super.A.D. 1960), A--701, Matits v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.
New Jersey - 162 A.2d 854 (N.J. 1960), A--118, Baesler v. Globe Indem. Co.
New Jersey - 166 A.2d 345 (N.J. 1960), A--12, Matits v. Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.

See all quotations