From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

G. v. C

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 3, 1979
172 N.J. Super. 360 (App. Div. 1979)

Opinion

Submitted November 20, 1979 —

Decided December 3, 1979.

Appeal from The Union County Court, 172 N.J. Super. 123.

Before Judges MILMED and KING.

Hooley, Perselay, Butler Kelly, attorneys for appellant ( William B. Butler and William Wright on the brief).

Abraham J. Chasnoff, attorney for respondent ( Max H. Schloff on the brief).


In this bastardy proceeding a trial in the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court resulted in a dismissal in defendant's favor. Plaintiff appealed to the then County Court and over defendant's objection was granted a trial by jury. The jury returned a verdict in plaintiff's favor. Defendant appeals and contends that the trial judge (1) erred in granting plaintiff a jury trial in contravention of R. 4:74 6, (2) committed "plain error" in not permitting certain testimony to be read back to the jury, and (3) committed "plain error" in not dismissing the complaint because the child's blood had been completely replaced following birth because of RH complications.

With respect of defendant's first contention we affirm for the reasons stated in Judge Callahan's written opinion of September 12, 1978. Defendant's remaining two contentions are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Affirmed.


Summaries of

G. v. C

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 3, 1979
172 N.J. Super. 360 (App. Div. 1979)
Case details for

G. v. C

Case Details

Full title:G., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. C., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Dec 3, 1979

Citations

172 N.J. Super. 360 (App. Div. 1979)
412 A.2d 128

Citing Cases

State v. One 1990 Honda Accord

Hence, in 1776, colonial New Jersey's common-law courts included the Supreme Court, the Courts of Common…

Boston University v. University of Medicine

That reading of the Rule necessarily would produce an anomalous result, and the Court's Rules should not be…