Theurer v. Romano

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Theurer v. Romano, 85 N.J. Super. 142 (1964)
204 A.2d 204; 1964 N.J. Super. LEXIS 281
Pee

Theurer v. Romano

Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam.

The judgment of the Law Division is af-

firmed for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Artaserse, Theurer v. Borrone, 81 N. J. Super. 188 (Law Div. 1963).

On the cross-appeal of the intervening taxpayers concerning assessment of costs, the order of the trial judge is affirmed, there being no showing of mistaken exercise of discretion in relation to the determination thereon.

No costs on the cross-appeal. Costs on the main appeal to go as of course.

Reference

Full Case Name
J. BEIER THEURER, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, AND WILLIAM L. PHELPS, INTERVENERS-RESPONDENTS AND v. ANTHONY L. ROMANO, STEPHEN CAPPIELLO AND WALTER HAVENS, MEMBERS OF THE POLICE DEPARTMENT OF THE CITY OF HOBOKEN, AND
Cited By
1 case
Status
Published