1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 102 N.J.
  5. 102 N.J. Super. 279 (1968)
 

NEWMARK v. GIMBEL'S, INC., ET AL.

102 N.J. Super. 279 (1968)

246 A.2d 11

RUTH NEWMARK AND DUDLEY NEWMARK, HER HUSBAND, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. GIMBEL'S INCORPORATED, A CORPORATION, AND SELIGMAN & LATZ PARAMUS CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Supplemental Briefs Filed July 30, 1968.

Decided August 7, 1968.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Herman B. Packer argued the cause for appellants (Mr. Saul Peres, attorney).

Mr. John W. Grady argued the cause for respondents.

Before Judges CONFORD, COLLESTER and LABRECQUE.

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

Plaintiffs Ruth Newmark and Dudley Newmark, her husband, appeal from denial of their motion for judgment in their favor and from a judgment in favor of defendants based upon a jury verdict of no cause for action. For purposes of the present appeal defendants will be considered as one.

Mrs. Newmark sued for injury to her skin and loss of hair following a permanent wave treatment at defendant's beauty...

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