MURRAY v. NICOL


224 N.J. Super. 303 (1988)

540 A.2d 239

MICHAEL MURRAY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT/CROSS-RESPONDENT, v. KARI S. NICOL AND EDWARD NICOL, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS/CROSS-APPELLANTS, AND THE TOWNSHIP OF UNION, DEFENDANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided April 7, 1988.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Daniel G. Larkins argued the cause for appellant/cross-respondent (Goldberger & Finn, attorneys; Daniel G. Larkins on the brief).

Paul A. Spina, Jr., argued the cause for respondents/cross-appellants (McDermott, McGee & Ruprecht, attorneys; Paul A. Spina, Jr. on the brief).

Before Judges DREIER and BAIME.


The opinion of the court was delivered by BAIME, J.A.D.

This appeal and cross-appeal present questions of first impression. At issue is whether N.J.S.A. 59:9-3b, which mandates that in any case involving a public entity a settlement by one joint tortfeasor must be deducted pro tanto from a judgment against another joint tortfeasor, is applicable where the non-settling party is a private person.1 Ancillary questions

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