ALEXANDER ROCHINSKY AND MARY ROCHINSKY, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,
v.
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND COUNTY OF ESSEX AND TOWN OF NUTLEY, DEFENDANTS.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued October 13, 1987.
Decided May 23, 1988.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Benjamin Clarke, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant (W. Cary Edwards, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; James J. Ciancia, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Benjamin Clarke and Madeleine W. Mansier, Deputy Attorney General, on the brief).
Barry Fredson argued the cause for respondents (Goldstein, Ballen, O'Rourke & Wildstein, attorneys).
Marc A. Vaida and David G. Paul submitted a letter brief on behalf of amici curiae, New Jersey League of Municipalities and the New Jersey Institute of Municipal Attorneys (Vaida and Vaida, attorneys).
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
The judgment of the Court was delivered by STEIN, J.
In this case we consider whether the absolute immunity for snow-removal activities conferred on public entities by our decision in Miehl v. Darpino,53 N.J. 49 (1968), was preserved by the enactment of the Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:1-1 to 14-4 (the Act). We conclude that the Act did not abrogate that immunity.
The...
Let's get started
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.
