GREELY v. GREELY


943 A.2d 841 (2008)

194 N.J. 168

Julie GREELY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Sean GREELY, Defendant-Appellant.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided March 19, 2008.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

David H. Pikus argued the cause for appellant (Bressler, Amery & Ross, attorneys; Mr. Pikus and Genevieve K. LaRobardier, Florham Park, on the briefs).

Paul H. Townsend, Morristown, argued the cause for respondent (Cutler, Simeone, Townsend, Tomaio & Newmark, attorneys).


PER CURIAM.

This appeal presents limited questions concerning the procedures to be followed in seeking a voluntary dismissal of a complaint for divorce or, in the alternative, dismissal by the plaintiff of that complaint under the forum non conveniens doctrine. For the reasons that follow, we conclude that voluntary dismissals in the Family Part of the Chancery Division are governed by Rule 4:37-1 and that the...

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