ABRAHAM FREITAG (PLAINTIFF)
v.
THE STRAND OF ATLANTIC CITY, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, EMANUEL SOLOMON AND EVELYN SOLOMON, HIS WIFE (DEFENDANTS) AND UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (INTERVENER) AND WILLIAM L. TAUB (COUNTER-CLAIMANT, APPELLANT)
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court considered whether a conviction for driving under the influence of liquor should be affirmed, addressing the procedural validity of initiating a prosecution based on a blotter entry and the admissibility of drunkometer test results.
The court affirmed the conviction, finding that while the procedural validity of using a blotter entry without a sworn statement was questionable, the appellant had sufficient notice of the charges and the drunkometer test results were admissible.
The appellant was convicted of driving under the influence of liquor by the municipal court of Miami Shores Village. She appealed, arguing that the pr…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
PER CURIAM.
The brief with appendix of Taub, counter-claimant, appellant, was due on May 15, 1952. Thereafter the time for filing the brief was extended until July 15, 1952. A second extension was granted him to September 13, 1952. Today the court has made an order granting him a third extension until October 6, 1952.
The case is an important one. Taub has at times employed or attempted to employ different counsel but the last two applications for extensions have been made by him pro se. For this reason the court has granted some extensions of time to him with perhaps greater generosity than his excuses merit. We point out that the present extension has taxed patience to the breaking point. If Taub’s brief is not filed on or before October 6, 1952, his appeal will be liable to dismissal for want of prosecution.