PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING, LLC. v. SHOLOM MOSKOWITZ
Annotate this CaseNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. A-4643-08T24643-08T2
PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING II, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING III, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING IV, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING V, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING VI, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING VII, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING VIII, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING IX, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING X, LLC, PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING F.S., LLC, all New Jersey Limited Liability Companies, GERSHON ALEXANDER, BRUCE G. BOHUNY, and HAROLD P. COOK, III, ESQ.,
Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
SHOLOM MOSKOWITZ, a/k/a SOL MOS KO WITZ, individually, CHARLENE MOSKOWITZ, WOLF WERCEBERGER, individually, DAVID SINGAL, SUZETTE CARADAS, ESQ., EDINALDO MOREIRA, ACADEMY INVESTMENT & MANAGEMENT, INC., LLC, a New Jersey Corporation, SOUTH 2nd DEVELOPMENT LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, MT REALTY LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, TEXAM HOLDINGS LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, SUNSHINE DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, SW SUNSET DEVELOPMENT LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, SUNSET REALTY HOLDINGS LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, CHANCELLOR PARTNERS, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, WOODLAND REALTY DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a New Jersey Limited Liability Company, MAYGAR BANK, SAMUEL SILVERMAN, ESQ., MANUEL LAGO, ESQ., SHEILA A. JONES, BARRY A. WENGER, ESQ.,
Defendants-Respondents.
________________________________
Submitted January 27, 2010 - Decided
Before Judges Payne and C. L. Miniman.
On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Essex County, Docket No. C-185-08.
Lentz & Gengaro, attorneys for appellants (David W. Lentz, of counsel and on the brief).
Meyner and Landis LLP, attorneys for respondents (William J. Fiore, on the brief).
PER CURIAM
We have been advised prior to argument that this matter has been amicably adjusted, and the parties have stipulated to the dismissal of this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
Dismissed.
(continued)
(continued)
2
A-4643-08T2
February 8, 2010
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.