Skip to main content

Dolson v. Anastasia

Citations

  • 258 A.2d 706
  • 55 N.J. 2

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • holding that the scope of appellate review is the same as that applied by the trial judge on a motion for a new trial under Rule 4:49-1
  • holding that in reviewing the trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial, \the appellate court must give deference to the views of the trial judge . . . .\
  • noting trial court’s ability to take account of “intangible ‘feel of the case’ ... gained by presiding over the trial”
  • noting the appellate tribunal’s deference to the trial judge in matters “not transmitted by the written record”
  • noting appellate court must defer to findings grounded on a witness's 9 A-1224-15T3 demeanor or other criteria not transmitted by the written record
  • noting trial court’s ability to take account of “intangible ‘feel of the case’ ... gained by presiding over the trial”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Hall

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

389 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

1 case in this archive is cited by this case.

Other cases named Dolson v. Anastasia

1 other CourtListener record shares this case name.

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.