Hoagland v. Springer

Supreme Court of New Jersey December 17, 1962

Hoagland v. Springer, 186 A.2d 679 (N.J. 1962)

39 N.J. 32; 1962 N.J. LEXIS 142

Per Curiam

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered

Per Curiam.

The refusal of the trial court to vacate the service of summons on the defendant Cummins Diesel Michigan, Inc. is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Goldmann in the Appellate Division. 75 N. J. Super. 560 (1962).

Subsequent to the oral argument we were advised by agreement of counsel that on April 11, 1960 Cummins Diesel Michigan, Inc. recorded in the office of the County Clerk of Somerset County, New Jersey, the conditional sale contract between it and William C. Springer covering the diesel engine sold to Springer and installed by it in his Ford tractor. The tractor and the engine were made subject to the contract. Such action on defendant’s part provides additional support for the conclusion that it was properly subjected to service of process of the Superior Court of this State.

Hall and Hanemaüst, JJ., concurring in result.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintraub, and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor, Hall, Schettiito and Hahe-man — 7.

For reversal — None.

Reference

Full Case Name: Elmer T. Hoagland, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. William C. Springer, Defendant-Respondent, and Cummins Engine Company, Inc., a Corporation of the State of Indiana, Cummins Diesel Metropolitan, Inc., a Corporation of the State of Delaware, Defendants, and Cummins Diesel Michigan, Inc., a Corporation of the State of Michigan, Defendant-Appellant
Cited By: 18 cases
Status: Published