# McCloskey v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · October 7, 1926 · 4 N.J. Misc. 832

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7282746

## Case

- **Full name:** HARRY McCLOSKEY, PROSECUTOR v. BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS Of NEW JERSEY
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** October 7, 1926
- **Citations:** 4 N.J. Misc. 832; 134 A. 923; 1926 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 105
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Cited by:** 0 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7282746

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
A rule to show cause was allowed by the court, why a writ of certiorari should not be allowed to review a decision by the board of public utility commissioners, dated January 12th, 1926. Our examination of the record and the briefs, filed in this case, lead us to, the same conclusion as that of the board of public utility commissioners. The primary questions involved are pure questions of fact, one of which is, whether the prosecutor, Harry McCloskey, was operating an auto bus with the consent of the municipal authorities.
The rule to show cause is discharged.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7282746. Public record. Not legal advice.