Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
0.91s
Nagengast v. Board of Education
6 N.J. Misc. 703 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 2, 1928
Cited 0 timesPublished6 N.J. Misc. 706 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 2, 1928
Cited 0 timesPublishedBruinooge v. Clifton Township Planning Board
111 N.J. 631 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 21, 1988
Cited 0 timesPublishedNo opinion textRosenblatt v. Zoning Board of Adjustment
108 N.J. 648 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 11, 1987
Cited 0 timesPublishedNo opinion textClarence Haley v. Board of Review
Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 17, 2021
And, unlike the claimant in Fennell v. Board of Review, 297 N.J. Super. 319 (App. … The Board further argues that the Appellate Division decision does not conflict with DeLorenzo v. Board of Review, 100 N.J. Super. 473, 476 (App.
Cited 0 timesPublished73 N.J. 56 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 18, 1977
Cited 0 timesPublished69 N.J. 378 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 29, 1975
Cited 0 timesPublished65 N.J. 559 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 18, 1974
Cited 0 timesPublishedDonaldson v. Board of Education
59 N.J. 272 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 21, 1971
Cited 0 timesPublishedFreilitzsch v. Board of Education
7 N.J. Misc. 7 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 6, 1928
Schmalz v. Wooley, 57 N. J. Eq. 303. … Haynes v. Cape May, 52 N. J. L. 180; Roche v. Jersey City, 40 Id. 257; DeGinther v. New Jersey Home, &c., 58 Id. 354.
Cited 0 timesPublished5 N.J. Misc. 668 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 18, 1927
The proceedings of the board of adjustment of the town of Westfield, denying the petition of appeal uf the prosecutors from the refusal of the building inspector of the town of Westfield to grant a permit for the erection … The facts of this case fall within the ruling of the Supreme Court in Hendy v. Ackerman, 5 N. J. Adv. R. 600, where, under a like state of facts, the action of the board was set aside. The cited case is controlling.
Cited 0 timesPublishedWood v. Board of Commissioners
10 N.J. Misc. 144 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 20, 1932
Cited 0 timesPublishedMcKerihan v. Board of Education
14 N.J. Misc. 571 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 1936
This case is similar in all essential features to that of Walker v. Board of Education, 116 N. J. L. 595, and we reach the same result as in that ease for the reasons expressed therein.
Cited 0 timesPublishedBoard of Education v. Shepherd
15 N.J. Misc. 394 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 27, 1937
The board of education appeals from an order of the state board of education directing Shepherd’s reinstatement. … The charge was failure to be on his joh one afternoon during school hours in violation of a new rule adopted by the board. Of this rule Shepherd was not apprised.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRossi v. Board of Commissioners
8 N.J. Misc. 465 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 27, 1930
This case comes up on writ of certiorari to review certain resolutions of the board of commissioners of the city of Perth Amboy, authorizing payments under a contract made between the said city and Stillman, Delahanty & Ferris … Wood v. Millville, 85 N. J. L. 734. The writ is dismissed, without costs.
Cited 0 timesPublished48 N.J.L. 452 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1886
On the 21st day of May the common council passed a resolution that the said board of health be substituted for and declared to be a board of health, under the terms and provisions of an act of the legislature of this state … L., p. 206,) does not authorize the re-organization of existing boards ; it relates to the creation of new boards of health in a manner with which the defendant has not complied. The act of 1881, (Pamph.
Cited 0 timesPublishedMcCutcheon v. Board of Equalization
88 N.J.L. 728 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 6, 1916
Cited 0 timesPublishedHorner v. Board of Commissioners
91 N.J.L. 695 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 31, 1918
Cited 0 timesPublished78 N.J.L. 218 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 20, 1909
The case presented is this: On May 2d, 1907, Joseph Peatokas applied to the board of excise of the city of Elizabeth for a license to sell malt liquors and wines at No. 208 First street. … Nor was it a renewal of a license about to expire, because the minutes of the excise board show that the only action taken by it was the transfer of the license which would expire on June 5th, 1908.
Cited 0 timesPublished70 N.J.L. 336 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 29, 1904
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna