Case law

State v. Delaware, Lackawanna, & Western Railroad

30 N.J.L. 473 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1864

In 1827, the case of Brown v. The State of Maryland came before the court. … The court reaffirmed the doctrine announced in the case of Brown v.

Rice v. Murphy

135 N.J.L. 90 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 7, 1946

Brown et al., relators, v. Vincent J. Murphy et al., and the City of Newark, &c., respondents (134 N. J. L. 318), decided simultaneously herewith. Identical issues are presented for determination. … The parties rest upon the arguments presented in the Brown case.

Harvard Ent., Inc. v. Bd. of Adj. of Tp. of Madison

56 N.J. 362 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 6, 1970

Specifically, the trial court referred to Schmidt v. Board of Adjustment of City of Newark, 9 N. J. 405 (1952), and Socony Mobil Oil Co. v. Township of Ocean, 56 N. J. Super. 310 (Law Div. 1959), affd., 59 N. J. … Morris v. Postma, 41 N. J. 354, 359 (1964); Napierkowski v. Gloucester Tp., 29 N. J. 481, 492 (1959); Zampieri v. River Vale Tp., 29 N. J. 599, 605-606 (1959); Bogert v. Washington Tp., 25 N. J. 57, 62 (1957).

Press Broadcasting Corp. v. Township Committee of Waterford

102 N.J. 383 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 23, 1985

Tyrell v. Burke

110 N.J.L. 225 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 31, 1933

That such is the law of this state, regardless of what it may be in other jurisdictions, is clear from the cases of Valentine v. Englewood, 76 N. J. L. 509, in this court, and Johnson v. … There can be no doubt that under the eighth section of the act creating the board, chapter 156 of the laws of 1927, page 299, it was its duty to issue a license to such applicant as should upon examination satisfy the board

Charlton v. Columbia Real Estate Co.

67 N.J. Eq. 629 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 6, 1906

Brown St. of Fr. § 354a; Bateman v. Phillips, 15 East 272; Lee v. Cherry, 4 Am. St. Rep. 800 ; Moss v. Atkinson, 44 Cal. 3 ; Hollis v. Burgess, 37 Kan. 487 ; Moore v. Mountcastle, 61 Mo. 424 ; Barnett v. … If Brown v.

Donald Whiteman v. Township Council of Berkeley Township

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 10, 2025

Ibid.; see also Carton v. Tinton Falls, 177 N.J. Super. 404, 410 (App. … In addition, courts reviewing the actions of municipal zoning and planning boards must ensure that the boards acted “within their jurisdiction and ‘according to law.’” Paruszewski v.

Duvin v. State

76 N.J. 203 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 9, 1978

In Skulski v. Nolan, 68 N. J. 179 (1975) and in Ruvoldt v. Nolan, 63 N. J. 171 (1973) we upheld the power of a pension board to reopen pension proceedings after a pension has been granted. … In a similar vein, it was noted in Handlon v. Belleville, 4 N.

Rockhill v. Township of Chesterfield

23 N.J. 117 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 14, 1957

Schmidt v. Board of Adjustment of City of Newark, 9 N. J. 405 (1952). … Kane v. Board of Appeals of City of Medford, 273 Mass. 97 , 173 N. E. 1 (Sup. Jud. Ct. 1930); Strain v. Mims, 123 Conn. 275 , 193 A. 754 (Sup. Ct. Err. 1937); Stone v. Cray, 89 N. H. 483, 200 A. 517 (Sup. Ct. 1938).

Belle v. United Hospital Medical Center

90 N.J. 444 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 29, 1982

This case, like Goddard v. … Edwin Geyer Brown, and gave a brief summary of Dr. Brown’s opinion. On December 19, 1980, plaintiffs moved to have the report of Dr. Brown submitted to the panel.

State v. Corrigan

72 N.J.L. 64 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 8, 1905

I think it should be held that under .this act county *66 boards of election are lawful entities, and hence capable of being constituted by de facto members. Flaucher v. … Camden, 27 Vroom 244 . .Such boards, even if the members were illegally appointed, are competent to perform all acts for which boards composed of persons lawfully chosen would be competent. Dugan v.

Central R.R. Co. of N.J. v. State Tax Dept.

112 N.J.L. 5 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 7, 1933

United New Jersey Railroad and Canal Co. v. State Board of Taxes and Assessment et al., 128 Atl. Rep. 421 . … Pros.) v. Board of Public Works of the City of Camden, 57 N. J. L. 313; 30 Atl. Rep. 581 , and Stout v. Edison Portland Cement Co., 82 N. J. L. 133; 81 Atl. Rep. 737 .

McCarter v. McKelvey

78 N.J.L. 3 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 10, 1909

In the case of Varney v. … Barker v. People, 3 Cow. 686 .

Gaston v. Ackerman

6 N.J. Misc. 696 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 29, 1928

We are of the opinion that the affidavit of the prosecutor shows that he is entitled to have the proceedings of the board of appeals, or board of adjustment, reviewed. … In this respect his position has been strengthened by the legislation contained in chapter 274 of the laws of 1928, which is fully considered in the case of Koplin v. South Orange, 6 N. J. Mis. R. 489.

National Lumber Products Co. v. Ponzio

133 N.J.L. 95 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 1945

Green v. Board of Commissioners of Newark, 131 N. J. L. 336; 36 Atl. Rep. (2d) 610; Pieretti v. Johnson, supra,; Saraydar v. Newark, 131 N. J. L. 290; 36 Atl. Rep. (2d) 289. Prosecutor has made no such showing. … Brandon v. Montclair, 125 N. J. L. 367, 368; Green v. Board of Commissioners of Newark, supra (at p. 338). The writ is dismissed, with costs.

Cerdel Construction Co. v. Township Committee of East Hanover

86 N.J. 303 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 11, 1981

This is a companion case to Evesham Township Zoning Board of Adjustment and Wilbert D. Abele v. Evesham Township Council et a1. decided this same day. 86 N.J. 295 (1981). … Kohl v. Mayor and Council of Fair Lawn, 50 N.J. 268, 275 (1967); see also, Grundlehner v. Dangler, 29 N.J. 256, 266 (1959); Beirn v. Morris, 14 N.J. 529,536 (1954); Lumund v.

Donovan v. Bachstadt

91 N.J. 434 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 9, 1982

In Zeliff v. … . & A. 1927) (benefit of bargain denied; vendor willing to convey but could not clear title defect; dictum indicates that such damages would be available for willful refusal to convey); Brown v.

Allen v. Humphrey

74 N.J.L. 255 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 25, 1907

The declaration sets out that the plaintiff prosecutes for the board of chosen freeholders of the county of Hunterdon, but fails to disclose any authority conferred upon him for the purpose, and the first ground of demurrer … L. 1903, p. 547), which provides that “if the board of chosen freeholders of any county * * * shall fail to prosecute any claim or demand of such county, * * * any court in *256 which an action on such claim or demand is

State ex rel. Davis v. Davis

57 N.J.L. 80 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1894

City of Hoboken v. Gear, 3 Dutcher 265; Love v. Jersey City, 11 Vroom 456 . The plea fails to show any title in the respondents, and the ordinary rule is that such title must be exhibited or the plea is bad. High Extr. … Off, § 125; State v. Stocking, 7 Ind. 329 ; Am. & Eng. Encycl. L., vol. 19, p. 430.

Rohrs v. Zabriskie

102 N.J.L. 473 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 5, 1926

Manning v. Hauge, 128 Atl. … The power to issue a writ of mandamus is a discretionary one (Jones Co. v. Guttenberg, 66 N. J. L. 58; O’Hara v.