From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

NATELL v. HENLEY, ET AL

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Oct 11, 1968
103 N.J. Super. 161 (App. Div. 1968)

Opinion

Argued September 30, 1968 —

Decided October 11, 1968.

Appeal from Superior Court, Law Division

Before Judges CONFORD, KILKENNY and LEONARD.

Mr. Robert F. Colquhoun argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Allan Maitlin argued the cause for respondent ( Messrs. Feuerstein Sachs, attorneys; Mr. Peter S. Valentine, on the brief).


The judgment is affirmed essentially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Ackerman in the Law Division, 97 N.J. Super. 116 (1967), except those based upon the incidence of subrogation in favor of the landlord's insurer. The insurance company is not a party to this appeal (even if it is the real party in interest as a subrogee); its contractual rights vis-a-vis the landlord are not here involved; and the lease in question should be read and interpreted to ascertain the mutual intention of the sole parties to it, landlord and tenant, just as the Supreme Court did in the case where the tenant was suing the landlord, Mayfair Fabrics v. Henley, 48 N.J. 483 (1967).

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

NATELL v. HENLEY, ET AL

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Oct 11, 1968
103 N.J. Super. 161 (App. Div. 1968)
Case details for

NATELL v. HENLEY, ET AL

Case Details

Full title:WILLIAM B. NATELL, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. HENRY HENLEY, ET AL.…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Oct 11, 1968

Citations

103 N.J. Super. 161 (App. Div. 1968)
246 A.2d 749

Citing Cases

Schoolhouse Commons at Union Ave. Condo. Ass'n v. CCTS Tax Liens I, L.L.C.

We also reject CCTS's argument that the bar on actions against the homeowners association based on damage to…

PURO INTERN. OF N.J. v. CALIFORNIA UNION

The law in New Jersey on this matter is well-settled. In Mayfair Fabrics v. Henley, 97 N.J. Super. 116, 234…