HARRIS v. SCHENKEL


26 N.J. 166 (1958)

138 A.2d 836

MOE HARRIS AND LENA HARRIS, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. JOSEPH SCHENKEL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided February 17, 1958.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Herbert J. Kenarik argued the cause for appellants.

Mr. George J. Lasky argued the cause for respondents W.L. Holding Co. and William Liebowitz.

Mr. Fred Feinberg argued the cause for respondents Joseph Schenkel and Peter Dedoussis.


The opinion of the court was delivered PER CURIAM.

Defendants moved for summary judgment. The trial court found a triable issue as to liability, and we agree. It concluded, however, that no damages were shown and on that basis granted the motion. We think that elements of damages appeared. The alleged violation of the broker's agreement supports a claim for nominal damages. In addition there is the obligation incurred by plaintiffs to their attorney for preparation...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

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