Skip to main content
· 11/12/1986

Shultz v. Bowen

Citations

  • 662 F. Supp. 1074
  • 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17838

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that corporation with no property in New Jersey subject to CBT Act because it employed “a regional sales representative in New Jersey” who sold products and held educational sessions for customers

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Pollak

Read full opinion on CourtListener

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.