Case ID: nj_91/html/0426-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

WILFRED TANTUM, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CHARLES D. BINZ, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    Argued September 28, 1982
    Decided October 18, 1982.
    
      Laurence M. McHeffey argued the cause for appellant (Hanlon, Dempsey & McHeffey, attorneys).
    
      Hugh Porter argued the cause for respondent (Enright, Porter & Lenney, attorneys).
   PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the dissenting opinion of Judge Botter, reported at 186 N.J.Super. 296, 302 (1981).

For reversal — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices CLIFFORD, SCHREIBER, HANDLER, POLLOCK and O’HERN —6.

For affirmance —None.