Opinion · Supreme Court of New Jersey
Betenbaugh v. Princeton Hospital
50 N.J. 390
- 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
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.