1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 93 N.J.
  5. 93 N.J. Super. 484 (1967)
 

HOBOKEN CAMERA CTR., INC. v. HARTFORD ACC. & IND.

93 N.J. Super. 484 (1967)

226 A.2d 439

HOBOKEN CAMERA CENTER, INC., PHOTOPOOL, INC., CONSOLIDATED DISTRIBUTING CORP., SHOPPERS WORLD CAMERA CENTER, INC., MULTIPOOL, INC., AND KAYE CAMERA EXCHANGE, INC., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. HARTFORD ACCIDENT AND INDEMNITY COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided January 23, 1967.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Edward K. Zuckerman argued the cause for appellants.

Mr. Murray Greiman argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Lifland & Greiman, attorneys).

Before Judges CONFORD, FOLEY and LEONARD.

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

This is an action on a blanket position bond (employee fidelity insurance) covering three camera stores formerly operated by plaintiffs in Duluth, St. Paul and Minneapolis, all in Minnesota. Plaintiffs sued to recover losses aggregating $42,705.22, broken down to $13,752.20 at Duluth, $13,079.16 at St. Paul, and $15,873.86 at Minneapolis. All losses are alleged to have been sustained between July and September...

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