Hardison v. King

  • Dan T. Matrafajlo
  • Wed May 2019
  • 0

Dan T. Matrafajlo

An Appellate Division case that arose out of an appeal of a trial court’s decision granting Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment. In other words, the trial court Judge felt the law prevented Mr. Hardison from seeking monetary damages for his injuries since he had three prior injuries to the same body parts. In disagreement with the Judges determination an Appeal was filed. At the Appellate Division, which comprises of a three-Judge panel, the Court reversed the trial court’s finding which created a narrow exception to the then existing law.

This post is also available in %s.

More Other Case Results

39:4-50

DWI, unsafe lane change, careless driving, and improper passing were all DISMISSED

39:4-98

My client, Matt Pinter, was stopped

N.J. 218

After petitioner pled guilty and served

WL 470640

Dan T. Matrafajlo argued for the plaintiff

129, 137-38

An Appellate Division case that arose out of an appeal of a trial court’s decision granting Defend

  • logos