Case ID: nj_134/html/0187-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. STEIN, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

631 A.2d 1245
    MARIA RIBEIRO COSTA-HUGHES, PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, v. MULLEN CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT.
    Argued September 14, 1993 —
    Decided October 28, 1993.
    
      Mark B. Zirulnik argued the cause for appellant (Isaacson, Dougherty & Zirulnik, attorneys; Louis M. Masucci, Jr., on the brief).
    
      Robert A Greenberg argued the cause for respondent (Ravich, Roster, Tobin, Oleckna, Reitman & Greenstein, attorneys).
   PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion for the Appellate Division, reported at 267 N.J.Super. 439, 631 A.2d 1245 (1992).

STEIN, J.,

dissenting.

I would reverse, substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Brochin’s dissenting opinion, reported at 267 N.J.Super. 439, 631 A.2d 1245 (1992).