1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. R.R. v. V.R.
 

R.R. v. V.R.

No. A-1228-11T4.

R.R., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. V.R., Defendant-Appellant.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided September 19, 2012 Motion for clarification and reconsideration granted.

Supplemental opinion Decided October 25, 2012.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Steven Resnick argued the cause for appellant (Budd Larner, P.C., attorneys; Patricia Tuckman, Elizabeth M. Foster-Fernandez and Armando R. Horta, on the briefs; Barry L. Baime, on the motion brief).

Sheryl E. Koomer argued the cause for respondent (Hellring Lindeman Goldstein & Siegal, LLP, attorneys; Ms. Koomer and Bruce S. Etterman, of counsel and on the brief; Ms. Koomer, Mr. Etterman and Jonathan L. Goldstein, on the motion brief).

Before Judges Espinosa and Kennedy.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

PER CURIAM.

Following this court's decision, defendant's counsel filed a letter and submissions with the court. The court advised counsel for both parties that the letter from defendant's counsel would be considered a formal motion for clarification of the court's opinion and reconsideration of the court's denial of defendant's request that this matter be remanded to a different judge.1 A briefing schedule...

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