State v. Scott
State of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Rory Scott, Defendant-Respondent
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Ashbey’s concurring and dissenting opinion, reported at 231 N.J.Super. at 269, 555 A.2d 667 (1989).
Dissent
CLIFFORD, J.,
dissenting.
I would affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Brody’s opinion, reported at 231 N.J.Super. 258 , 555 A.2d 667 (1989).
For reversal — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN — 6.
For affirmance — Justice CLIFFORD — 1.
Combined text as published — syllabus, headnotes and all opinions in one document
118 N.J. 406 (1990) 571 A.2d 1304
STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
RORY SCOTT, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Argued January 30, 1990. Decided April 9, 1990.
*407 Steven J. Kaflowitz, Assistant Prosecutor, argued the cause for appellant ( John H. Stamler, Union County Prosecutor, attorney).
William J. McCarthy argued the cause for respondent.
Jessica S. Oppenheim, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for amicus curiae Attorney General of New Jersey ( Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General, attorney).
PER CURIAM.
The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Ashbey's concurring and dissenting opinion, reported at 231 N.J. Super. at 269, 555 A. 2d 667 (1989).
CLIFFORD, J., dissenting.
I would affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Brody's opinion, reported at 231 N.J. Super. 258 , 555 A. 2d 667 (1989).
For reversal Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices HANDLER, POLLOCK, O'HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN 6.
For affirmance Justice CLIFFORD 1.
How later courts describe this case
Explanatory parentheticals written by citing courts — 2 in all; the most informative distinct ones are shown.
-
(rev'g on concurring and dissenting opinion, 231 N.J.Super. 258, 269-77, 555 A. 2d 667, 672-76 (App.Div.1989))
-
(court had vacated temporary restraining order in domestic violence case just four days before arrest)
Cited by 11 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.