Case Name: PHILIP KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, BOBCAR CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND NORMAN KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, TRUSTEES IN DISSOLUTION OF EMPIRE HOLDING CO., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. 12-22 WOODLAND AVENUE CORPORATION T/A SUBURBAN ESSEX RIDING CLUB AND MAYFAIR FARMS HOLDING CORP., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1977-06-13
Citations: 150 N.J. Super. 503
Docket Number: 
Parties: PHILIP KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, BOBCAR CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND NORMAN KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, TRUSTEES IN DISSOLUTION OF EMPIRE HOLDING CO., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. 12-22 WOODLAND AVENUE CORPORATION T/A SUBURBAN ESSEX RIDING CLUB AND MAYFAIR FARMS HOLDING CORP., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Superior Court Reports
Volume: 150
Pages: 503–504

Head Matter:
PHILIP KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, BOBCAR CORPORATION, A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, AND NORMAN KRUVANT, CHARLES KRUVANT, TRUSTEES IN DISSOLUTION OF EMPIRE HOLDING CO., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. 12-22 WOODLAND AVENUE CORPORATION T/A SUBURBAN ESSEX RIDING CLUB AND MAYFAIR FARMS HOLDING CORP., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued May 17, 1977
Decided June 13, 1977.
Before Judges Lora, Crane and Michels.
Mr. William, L. Brach argued the cause on behalf of appellants (Messrs. Brach, Eichler, Rosenberg and Silver, attorneys).
Mr. Sheppard A. Guryan argued the cause ou behalf of respondent 12-22 Woodland Avenue Corporation t/a Suburban Essex Riding Club (Messrs. Lasser, Lasser, Sarohin & Hochman, attorneys).

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
Our review of the record has persuaded us
that the factual findings of the Law Division judge could reasonably have been reached on the evidence. The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Dwyer in his opinion which is reported at 138 N. J. Super. 1 (Law Div. 1975). See Rova Farms Resort v. Investors Ins. Co., 65 N. J. 474, 483-484 (1974); Mannillo v. Gorski, 54 N. J. 378 (1969).