Case law

Born v. Board of Adjustment

6 N.J. Misc. 551 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 8, 1928

As was said by this court in Feldman & Pivnick, Incorporated v. Board of Adjustment of East Orange, 6 N. J. Mis. … R. 96], and there is further presumption that the action of the board was right. Silvester v. Princeton, 5 N. J. Adv. R. 1801.

Koogan v. Board of Adjustment

6 N.J. Misc. 562 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 9, 1928

An appeal was taken to the board of adjustment which was requested to change the said zone to business-industrial zone, and the board having considered the application, but with *563 out taking testimony or swearing witnesses … We think the facts of this case fall within the legal rule which is stated in the opinion filed in Born v.

Burg v. Board of Adjustment

6 N.J. Misc. 804 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 1928

The judgment and proceedings under review are affirmed and the writ of certiorari dismissed under authority of Bellofatto et al. v. Montclair, 6 N. J. Mis. R. 512.

Linbarger v. Board of Education

83 N.J.L. 629 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 20, 1912

Holden v. Board of Education

85 N.J.L. 370 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 17, 1913

Board of Pharmacy v. Faunce

6 N.J. Misc. 385 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 19, 1928

Cadien v. Board of Education

2 N.J. Misc. 109 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 3, 1924

These powers seem to have been considered in Fuller v. Board, 78 N. J. L. 107, where it was held that a vote authorizing the purchase did not have the effect of authorizing acquisition by condemnation. … The case of Brown v. Street Lighting District, 69 N. J. L. 485, is invoked on this point.

Williams v. Board of Commissioners

2 N.J. Misc. 918 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 3, 1924

It is urged that under the rule laid down in Haake v. Norwood, 2 N. J. Adv. R. 1046, the ordinance was improperly passed. This is not the first application made for a writ of certiorari to review this ordinance. Mr.

Board of Justices v. Fennimore

1 N.J.L. 281 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1794

Cited in Orange v. Springfield, 1 South. 186 . See 4 Burr. 2489; 4 Dall. 113 .

Meehan v. Board of Excise Commissioners

73 N.J.L. 382 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 7, 1906

See, also, Commonwealth v. Casey, 134 Mass. 194 ; Metropolitan Board of Excise v. Barrie, 34 N. Y. 657 ; State of New Hampshire v. Corron et al., 62 Atl. Rep. 1044 . … Hoboken v. Goodman, 39 Vroom 217 ; Croker v. Board of Excise of Camden, post.

Shelko v. Board of Education

97 N.J. 414 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 7, 1984

See Spiewak v. Board of Educ. of Rutherford, 90 N.J. 63 (1982). … In Stuermer v.

State v. Board of Health

107 N.J. 50 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 3, 1986

Kramer v. Board of Education

99 N.J. 173 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 30, 1984

Wall v. Board of Commissioners

27 N.J. 545 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 27, 1958

The facts appear in Krieger v. Jersey City, 27 N. J. 535. Magistrate Wall also sought a declaration that he holds the office of magistrate and a judgment for back pay. Both parties moved for summary judgment.

Preston v. Board of Education

67 N.J. 317 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 23, 1972

Cadien v. Board of Education

47 N.J. 81 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 3, 1966

Pedalino v. Board of Review

43 N.J. 129 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 3, 1964

PEDALINO, APPELLANT-PETITIONER, v. BOARD OF REVIEW, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. The Supreme Court of New Jersey. July 3, 1964. Mr. Conrad N. Koch for the petitioner. Mr. Edward A. Kaplan for the respondent. Denied.

McCutcheon v. Board of Equalization

88 N.J.L. 729 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 6, 1916

Moriarity v. Board of Commissioners

90 N.J.L. 328 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 5, 1917

Hornsey v. Board of Aldermen

99 N.J.L. 277 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 5, 1923