# City of Perth Amboy v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · November 12, 1926 · 4 N.J. Misc. 898

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7282775

## Case

- **Full name:** THE CITY OF PERTH AMBOY v. THE BOARD OF PUBLIC UTILITY COMMISSIONERS
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** November 12, 1926
- **Citations:** 4 N.J. Misc. 898; 134 A. 921; 1926 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 67
- **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/7282775

## Opinion text

Per Curiam.
This matter has been heard upon a rule to show cause why a writ of certiorari should not issue to review the decision of the board of public utility commissioners of January 7th, 1926, refusing to require the Central Eailroad Company of New Jersey and the Lehigh Valley Eailroad Company to change the construction of an overhead bridge at Washington street, in the city of Perth Amboy, which bridge had been fully constructed and completed at a cost of $300,000 by such railroad companies, pursuant to and in compliance with the order of said board dated May 17th, 1922, eliminating a dangerous railroad grade crossing, such order having been made in accordance with the “Fielder Grade Crossing act” (Pamph. L. 1913, ch. 57), after notice and hearing in which the representatives of the city of Perth Amboy participated, and acquiesced and approved of, and consented to, the plans upon which, and according to which, the bridge was constructed.
Aside from every other reason that might be advanced against the allowance of the writ in question, we find that the evidence before the board amply and completely justified its conclusion, as expressed in its judgment sought to be reviewed.
The rule to show cause is therefore dismissed.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7282775. Public record. Not legal advice.