Puder v. Buechel

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Decided 2005-06-07

Cited by 111 later decision(s) in our corpus · see the citation network in Lexace

Open in Lexace · Ask the AI about this case

From the opinion

Justice LONG, J., dissenting. I would affirm the judgment of the Appellate Division substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Kestin’s thorough and thoughtful opinion. Like the Appellate Division I would hold that, in the unique circumstances presented, the settlement of the matrimonial case was not an impediment to Mrs. Buechel’s malpractice action against Ms. Puder. I agree with the…

Read the full opinion (source) ↗


Lexace provides legal information, not legal advice, and no attorney–client relationship is created. Citation figures are counts of later citing opinions in our corpus and may be incomplete; always read and Shepardize the full opinion before relying on it.