Penthouse International Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
Penthouse International Ltd. v. Eastman Kodak Co.
184 N.J. Super. 130; 445 A.2d 428; 1982 N.J. Super. LEXIS 761
Cases that cite this one
2 later published cases cite this decision.
- Sgro v. Getty Petroleum Corp. (District Court, D. New Jersey 1994)
- American Handling Equip. v. TC Moffatt & Co. (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 of the Court
The judgment of the Chancery Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Lester in his opinion which is reported in 179 N.J.Super. 155.
Absent proof that the process of defendant is akin to a monopoly or constitutes by analogy a public utility, we agree that defendant may assert the conditions here involved when accepting film for processing.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.