Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey

Betenbaugh v. Princeton Hospital

Betenbaugh v. Princeton Hosp., 50 N.J. 390 (N.J. 1967)

Type
Opinion
Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction
New Jersey
Date
1967-11-20
Topic
estate-planning

50 N.J. 390 (1967) 235 A.2d 889 HELEN L. BETENBAUGH, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. PRINCETON HOSPITAL, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, ELLWOOD W. GODFREY AND R.J. BELFORD, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed Betenbaugh v. Princeton Hospital. The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

Cited by
7 opinions
50 N.J. 390 (1967) 235 A.2d 889

HELEN L. BETENBAUGH, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
PRINCETON HOSPITAL, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, ELLWOOD W. GODFREY AND R.J. BELFORD, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued November 6, 1967. Decided November 20, 1967.

*393 Mr. John A. Willette for appellant, Princeton Hospital, (Messrs. Williams & Willette, attorneys).

Mr. Daniel K. VanDorn for appellant, Ellwood W. Godfrey, (Messrs. Mead, Gleeson, Hansen & Pantages, attorneys; Mr. Victor C. Hansen, of counsel).

Mr. Robert J.C. McCoid for appellant, R.J. Belford (Messrs. Schneider & Morgan, attorneys).

Mr. Leonard J. Felzenberg for respondents (Messrs. Roskein, Kronisch & Felzenberg, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed for the reason expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, GOLDMANN, SCHETTINO and HANEMAN — 7.

For reversal — None.