S.C. v. A.C.

• Court: New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
• Writing for the Court: PER CURIAM
• Citation: S.C. v. A.C., 319 A.2d 733, 128 N.J.Super. 198 (N.J. Super. App. Div. 1974)
• Decision Date: 03 May 1974
• Parties: S.C., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. A.C., Defendant-Appellant.

Page 198

128 N.J.Super. 198

319 A.2d 733

S.C., Plaintiff-Respondent, v. A.C., Defendant-Appellant.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued April 23, 1974.

Decided May 3, 1974.

On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division.

Monroe Ackerman, Short Hills, for defendant-appellant (Rudd & Ackerman, Short Hills, attorneys; Charles E. Carlson, Jr., Newton, on the brief).

Everett M. Scherer, Newark, for plaintiff-respondent (Riker, Danzig, Scherer & Brown, Newark, attorneys; Thomas C. C. Humick, Newark, on the brief).

Before Judges CARTON, LORA and SEIDMAN.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Chancery Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the written opinion of Judge Consodine reported at 123 N.J.Super. 566, 304 A.2d 202 (Ch.Div.1973).