Case law

State v. Board of Excise

46 N.J.L. 312 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1884

The question was raised in Dufford v. Hoagland, argued and decided with Dufford v. Nolan, supra. It was not necessary to decide it then, but it now requires decision. … In that capacity he had a standing before the board of excise, and was entitled to present there these precise objections, which the board were bound to hear and determine. Dufford v. Nolan, supra.

Board of Justices v. Fennimore

1 N.J.L. 220 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1793

The act of assembly (Allinson 115) makes the county commissioners accountable to the board. … See Nimmo’s Executor v. Commonwealth, 4 Hen. and Munf. 57.

Horn v. Board of Adjustment

6 N.J. Misc. 801 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 1928

Baldwin v. Board of Adjustment

6 N.J. Misc. 802 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 1928

Under this writ we are asked to reverse the judgment of the board of adjustment of the city of East Orange, refusing to prosecutor a permit to erect an apartment house. Koplin v. South Orange, 6 N. J. Mis. … R. 489, and Bellofatto et al. v. Montclair, Ibid. 512, are controlling and the judgment under review is affirmed and the writ dismissed, with costs.

Horton v. Board of Education

6 N.J. Misc. 963 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 11, 1928

Stat., p. 4805) the city scheme may be adopted by referendum in a town, township or borough, and will then be operative therein, as in fact was the situation in Kay v. Board, &c., of Kearny, 83 N. J. … L. 551, 553, and in Scola v. Board, &c., of Montclair, 77 Id. 73, 75. Both Kearny and Montclair were towns, and had adopted the city scheme.

Johnson v. Board of Commissioners

33 N.J. Eq. 621 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1881

Barnert v. Board of Aldermen

69 N.J.L. 122 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 24, 1903

An ordinance for this purpose presented to the board in August, 1900, was defeated. … of aldermen, and, hence, the board cannot in deciding it be controlled by mandamus.

Niles v. Board of Education

70 N.J.L. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 9, 1903

thereon; provided, however, that said board of education, in purchasing said lands and erecting said school building, shall not make expenditures, or incur indebtedness, in excess of the amount realized from the sale of … It appears from the allegations of the declaration that the defendants, the board of education of the town of West New York, on the 31st day of May, 1899, by resolution adopted by *3 the votes of a majority of the members

Horner v. Board of Commissioners

90 N.J.L. 406 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 19, 1917

Johnson v. Van Horn, 45 N. J. L. 136; Poillon v. Rutherford, 58 Id. 113; Hohenstatt v. Bridgeton, 62 Id. 169. … Justice Dixon, in Robinson v. Hulick, 67 N. J. L. 496: “All persons interested, or about to become interested, in lands in New Jersey, are chargeable with notice of these laws and of their normal operation.

Coffey v. Board of Commissioners

130 N.J.L. 582 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 21, 1943

This writ brings up for .review the “proceedings relating to a certain ordinance known as Ordinance No. 1 * * * adopted by the Board of Commissioners of the City of Atlantic City and entitled £An ordinance fixing the salary … The ordinance, adopted at a Board meeting on January 21st, 1943, fixes the salary of the Registrar of Vital Statistics of Atlantic City at $1,960 per year, payable in semi-monthly installments.

Linbarger v. Board of Education

83 N.J.L. 446 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 18, 1912

Montrale v. People's Bank, 45 Vroom 464 . The sixteenth section of that act (Comp. … The case of Montvale v. People’s Bank, supra, therefore, controls that now under consideration, so far as the question of- delivery is concerned, and the judgment under review must be affirmed.

Glori v. Board of Police Commissioners

72 N.J.L. 131 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 27, 1905

The prosecutor was tried before the board of police commissioners upon charges made by the chief of police, was found guilty and dismissed from the force April 17th, 1903. The writ was allowed July 20th, 1904. … In Taylor v.

Clarence 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.

Schragger v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

58 N.J. 274 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 10, 1971

See Bergen County Sewer Authority v. Little Ferry, 5 N. J. 548, 552 (1950); Ross v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Essex County, 69 N. J. L. 291 (E. & A. 1903); New Jersey Zinc Co. v. … Sussex County Board of Equalization of *279 Taxes, 70 N. J. L. 186 (Sup. Ct. 1903); State v. Wildwood, 83 N. J. L. 188 (Sup. Ct. 1912); Murray v. Murray, 7 N. J. Super. 549 (Law Div. 1950).

Lupfer v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

87 N.J. Eq. 491 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 21, 1917

Scola v. Board of Education, 77 N. J. Law 73; Shaw v. Tren ton, 49 N. J. Law 339; Van Reipen v. Jersey City, 58 N. J. Law 262. … In Case v. Trenton, 76 N. J.

Battaglia v. Union County Welfare Board

88 N.J. 48 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 16, 1981

See Board of Regents v. … See Mirabella v. Board of Elections, 507 F.Supp. 338 (S.D.N.Y.1980), and Catterson v. Caso, 472 F.Supp. 833 (E.D.N.Y.1979).

Ross v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

69 N.J.L. 291 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 1, 1903

As was said in Paul v. … Although in State v.

Probst v. Board of Education

249 N.J. Super. 222 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 21, 1991

Service Armament Co. v. Hyland, 70 N.J. 550, 561 , 362 A.2d 13 (1976). … Ass’n v. Bd. of Educ., 96 N.J. 587, 595 , 476 A.2d 1245 (1984); Cordasco v. Bd. of Educ. of City of East Orange, 205 N.J.Super. 407, *230 411 , 501 A.2d 171 (App.Div.1985).

Buono v. Board of Trustees

94 N.J. 522 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 17, 1983

Wagner v. Board of Trustees

290 N.J. Super. 146 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 9, 1996

Charlotte Wagner (Wagner) appeals from the final determination of the Board of Trustees of the Teachers’ Pension & Annuity Fund (TPAF) denying her request for retired status death benefits related to the death of her sister … In support of his decision, the ALJ determined that the provisions of N.J.S.A 18A:66-47 requiring that an applicant survive for 30 days beyond the effective retirement date or Board approval of that retirement, whichever