New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, 1982

Is Smick Lumber v. Hubschmidt

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Decided January 11, 1982 · Judges Michels, McElroy and J.H. Coleman

440 A.2d 1160; 182 N.J. Super. 306 (Atlantic Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

7 later published cases cite this decision.

Merrill Lynch Credit Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation (New Jersey Tax Court 2018)
City of East Orange v. Township of Livingston (New Jersey Tax Court 2013)
Van Orden v. Township of Wyckoff (New Jersey Tax Court 2005)
Coldwell Banker v. BLANCKE PWLLC (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2004)
Roland-Leopoid v. Khoury (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1997)
RA Intile Realty Co. v. Raho (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1992)
Bowden v. Bowden (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1982)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion

182 N.J. Super. 306 (1982)440 A.2d 1160

I.S. SMICK LUMBER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
MARTHA E. HUBSCHMIDT AND JOHN F. HUBSCHMIDT, HER HUSBAND, STEPHEN P. FAULKNER, T/A PRIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, THE FEDERAL LAND BANK OF SPRINGFIELD, AND PRODUCTION CREDIT ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGETON, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued December 23, 1981.Decided January 11, 1982.

Before Judges MICHELS, McELROY and J.H. COLEMAN.

Harry A. Adler argued the cause for appellants.

Lawrence W. Point argued the cause for respondent (Action & Point, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

Defendants appeal an order granting summary judgment to plaintiff, a lumber dealer who filed and served a mechanic's and *307 materialman's lien with respect to materials supplied to a building owned by defendants Hubschmidt. Service of the lien was made by ordinary mail and was admittedly received by those defendants within five days of the date the notice of intention was filed in the county clerk's office. The issue framed below and here is whether this constitutes valid service within the spirit and intent of N.J.S.A. 2A:44-71.

We affirm the entry of summary judgment for plaintiff substantially for the reasons stated in the opinion of Judge Edward S. Miller, reported at 177 N.J. Super. 131 (Law Div. 1980).

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.

Cases that cite this one

Opinion

I.S. SMICK LUMBER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,v.MARTHA E. HUBSCHMIDT AND JOHN F. HUBSCHMIDT, HER HUSBAND, STEPHEN P. FAULKNER, T/A PRIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, THE FEDERAL LAND BANK OF SPRINGFIELD, AND PRODUCTION CREDIT ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGETON, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Before Judges MICHELS, McELROY and J.H. COLEMAN.

PER CURIAM.

I.S. SMICK LUMBER, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,
v.
MARTHA E. HUBSCHMIDT AND JOHN F. HUBSCHMIDT, HER HUSBAND, STEPHEN P. FAULKNER, T/A PRIDE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, THE FEDERAL LAND BANK OF SPRINGFIELD, AND PRODUCTION CREDIT ASSOCIATION OF BRIDGETON, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.