1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 153 N.J.
  5. 153 N.J. 371 (1998)
 

METTINGER v. GLOBE SLICING MACH. CO., INC.

153 N.J. 371 (1998)

709 A.2d 779

DAVID METTINGER, PLAINTIFF, v. GLOBE SLICING MACHINE CO., INC., NEW GLOBE PARENT, INC., DAPHNE HORIZON, CO., INC., ABC 1-5 (SAID ENTITIES BEING FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN), AND XYZ 1-5 (SAID ENTITIES BEING FICTITIOUS AND UNKNOWN COMPONENT PARTS MANUFACTURERS), DEFENDANTS, AND W.W. LOWENSTEN, INC., DEFENDANT AND THIRD PARTY PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. GLOBE FOOD EQUIPMENT COMPANY, THIRD PARTY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided May 14, 1998.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Joel Schneider, argued the cause for appellant (Archer & Greiner, attorneys; George F. Kugler, Jr. and Sean T. O'Meara, on the briefs).

Michelle Wall, argued the cause for respondent (Melli & Wright, attorneys).

The opinion of the Court was delivered by POLLOCK, J.

The ultimate issue is whether W.W. Lowensten, Inc. (Lowensten), a distributor, which sold and serviced a defective meat slicer that injured plaintiff, David Mettinger, is entitled to maintain an action for indemnification against Globe Food Equipment Company (Globe Food), the alleged successor to the product line of the manufacturer, Globe Slicing Machine Co. (Globe Slicing). The Law Division rejected Lowensten...

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