8 N.J. 228 (1951)

84 A.2d 626


The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided November 26, 1951.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Rudolph Eisner argued the cause pro se.


The appellant, who was successful in the Appellate Division of the Superior Court in reversing a judgment of the Chancery Division of that court, appeals here under a claim of right. He voices dissatisfaction with the opinion of the Appellate Division. Appeals, however, are taken from judgments and not from opinions. He also argues strenuously that the denial of costs by the court below constitutes a violation of his constitutional rights. Under our rules costs are not a matter of right but are discretionary, Rule 1:4-11 made applicable to the Appellate Division of the Superior Court by Rule 4:4-7. The sole basis advanced to establish a right to appeal in the instant case is the alleged existence of constitutional questions, Const., Art. VI, sec. V, par. 1 (a). After studying the brief of the appellant and after listening to his argument we perceive no constitutional questions. The appeal is therefore dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

For dismissal — Chief Justice VANDERBILT, and Justices CASE, HEHER, WACHENFELD, BURLING and ACKERSON — 6.

Opposed — None.


1000 Characters Remaining reserves the right to edit or remove comments but is under no obligation to do so, or to explain individual moderation decisions.

User Comments

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases