From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Van Duyne v. Caldwell Motors

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 20, 1961
71 N.J. Super. 518 (App. Div. 1961)

Opinion

Argued December 18, 1961 —

Decided December 20, 1961.

Appeal from The Morris County Court, Law Division.

Before Judges GOLDMANN, FOLEY and MOLINEUX.

Mr. Patrick J. Timmons argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Lewis P. Dolan, Jr., argued the cause for respondent ( Messrs. Dolan and Dolan, attorneys; Mr. William Martin Cox, on the brief).


The judgment of the County Court affirming the judgment entered in the Workmen's Compensation Division in favor of respondent because the Division did not have jurisdiction of the claim petition, is affirmed for the reasons stated by County Judge Mills. As he observed, the filing of a claim petition within the time prescribed by R.S. 34:15-51 is a jurisdictional requirement. Schwarz v. Federal Shipbuilding Dry Dock Co., 29 N.J. Super. 374 , 376 ( App. Div. 1954); Scaglione v. St. Paul Mercury Indemnity Co., 46 N.J. Super. 363, 368 ( App. Div. 1957).


Summaries of

Van Duyne v. Caldwell Motors

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Dec 20, 1961
71 N.J. Super. 518 (App. Div. 1961)
Case details for

Van Duyne v. Caldwell Motors

Case Details

Full title:MARVIN VAN DUYNE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT, v. CALDWELL MOTORS…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Dec 20, 1961

Citations

71 N.J. Super. 518 (App. Div. 1961)
177 A.2d 486

Citing Cases

Witty v. Fortunoff

The parties also agree that the two-year limitation period is a jurisdictional requirement and not…