# Close v. Kordulak Bros.

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · June 1, 1965 · 44 N.J. 589

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754589

## Case

- **Full name:** Garnet Close, Petitioner-Respondent and Cross-Appellant, v. Kordulak Bros., Respondent-Appellant and Cross-Respondent; Charles Henry Close, Petitioner-Respondent, v. Kordulak Bros., Respondent-Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** June 1, 1965
- **Citations:** 44 N.J. 589; 210 A.2d 753; 18 A.L.R. 3d 887; 1965 N.J. LEXIS 256
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by Proctor
- **Judges:** Proctor, Hall
- **Cited by:** 442 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754589

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- finding that a reviewing court gives "due regard" to the ability of the factfinder who heard the witnesses to judge credibility
- stating that courts should afford due deference "to the agency's expertise where such expertise is a pertinent factor"
- holding that scope of review of administrative decision “is the same as that [for] an appeal in any nonjury case”
- stating that courts give "due regard [ ] to the agency's expertise where such expertise is a pertinent factor"
- stating that courts should give "due regard" to agency expertise "where such expertise is a pertinent factor"

## Opinion text

Proctor, J.
(concurring). I am the only member of the present court who joined in the majority opinion in Russo v. United States Trucking Corp., 26 N. J. 430 (1958). Upon reconsideration of Russo, I am convinced that my position in that case was erroneous. I therefore subscribe fully to that part of the opinion in the present case which overrules the Russo doctrine, as well as the balance of the opinion.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintraub, and Justices Jacobs, Prancis, Proctor, Hall, Schettxno and Haneman —7.
For reversal—Hone.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9754589. Public record. Not legal advice.