1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 84 N.J.
  5. 84 N.J. Super. 9 (1964)
 

HENRY CLAY v. JERSEY CITY

84 N.J. Super. 9 (1964)

200 A.2d 787

HENRY CLAY, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, AND VAN LEER MANUFACTURING CORP., a NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT AND CROSS-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF JERSEY CITY, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT AND CROSS-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided May 22, 1964.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Meyer Pesin, Corporation Counsel of the City of Jersey City, argued the cause for appellant (Messrs. Joseph G. Mintz and Gustave A. Peduto, Assistants Corporation Counsel, of counsel and on the brief).

Mr. Leonard Lieberman argued the cause for respondents (Messrs. Hellring, Lindeman & Landau, attorneys; Messrs. Ehrenkranz & Lieberman, of counsel; Mr. Gilbert Ehrenkranz and Mr. Norman Bruck, on the brief).

Before Judges GAULKIN, FOLEY and LEWIS.

The opinion of the court was delivered by FOLEY, J.A.D.

The City of Jersey City (city) appeals from judgments entered in favor of the plaintiffs in the Chancery Division. Van Leer Manufacturing Corp. (Van Leer) cross-appeals from the amount of the judgment which was awarded to it.

Henry Clay, a corporation (Clay) and Van Leer, owner and lessee respectively of an industrial building premises located at 110 Hoboken...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases