Opinion

Woodbury Daily Times Co. v. GLOUCESTER CTY. SEWERAGE AUTH.

  • 158 N.J. Super. 448
  • 386 A.2d 445
Court
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Filed
Apr 20, 1978
Status
Published
On the bench
Judges Matthews, Crane and Antell
Cited by
4 cases
Authority
More cited than 64.5%

The opinion

158 N.J. Super. 448 (1978)

386 A.2d 445

WOODBURY DAILY TIMES CO., INC., T/A GLOUCESTER COUNTY TIMES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

v.

GLOUCESTER COUNTY SEWERAGE AUTHORITY, JACK C. SHEPPARD, FRANCIS A. WITT, GEORGE BROWN, WILLIAM MARTINELLI AND CHARLES FASOLA, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued April 4, 1978.

Decided April 20, 1978.

*449 Before Judges MATTHEWS, CRANE and ANTELL.

Mr. Charles J. Sprigman, Jr., argued the cause for appellant.

Mr. Harold L. Crass argued the cause for respondent ( Messrs. Herman, Pearson, Crass & Barry, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The factual setting for this dispute is adequately set forth in Judge Lowengrub's opinion, reported at 151 N.J. Super. 160 . Briefly, three out of the five members of the defendant Sewerage Authority met with representatives of the Department of Environmental Protection on May 2, 1977 to discuss the Department's order to the Authority concerning the disposal of sludge. There was no *450 public notice of the meeting. Plaintiff newspaper claimed that this meeting was held in violation of the Open Public Meetings Act ( N.J.S.A. 10:4-6 et seq. ) and sought an injunction against further violations of that act by the Authority.

While we disagree with the trial judge's suggestion that a joint meeting of more than one public body could not constitute a "public body" within the intendment of the act ( 151 N.J. Super. at 167 ), cf. Allan-Dean Corp. v. Tp. of Bedminster, 153 N.J. Super. 114, 117 (App. Div. 1977) (expressly disagreeing with the suggestion), we agree with his conclusion that the purpose of the May 2 meeting was informational for Authority members and not for the purpose of official action. Under such circumstances the group assembled was not a "public body" within the statutory definition.

Affirmed.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.