PUDDINGSTONE FUNDING, LLC. v. SHOLOM MOSKOWITZ

Annotate this Case

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE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.