Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
3.91s
Mechanics' Mutual Loan Ass'n v. Board of Chosen Freeholders
56 N.J.L. 6 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1893
Cited 0 timesPublishedHalsey Electric Generator Co. v. State Board of Assessors
74 N.J.L. 321 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 25, 1907
Cited 0 timesPublishedGreenville Bus Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners
126 N.J.L. 435 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 17, 1941
“(e) The corporate minute book, the stock ledger, the books of account, the Certificate of approval of the Board of Public Utility Commissioners, approving of the stock, and the certificates of approval of the Board of Public … This last proposal is beyond the competence of the Board and is not within the limits of the application.
Cited 0 timesPublishedLicata v. New Jersey State Board of Tax Appeals
113 N.J.L. 36 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 4, 1934
Cited 0 timesPublishedLehigh Valley Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners
5 N.J. Misc. 559 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 17, 1927
The view of the board on this point meets with my entire *561 concurrence. … I have no doubt whatever about the jurisdiction of the board. It is not claimed, I think, that it was challenged at the hearing.
Cited 0 timesPublishedFirst Church of Christ, Scientist v. Board of Adjustment
127 N.J.L. 325 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 13, 1941
It has been vacant for about fourteen years and is not salable for any purpose other than a gasoline station and lubritorium for which a permit was refused by the Fewark Board of Adjustment. … The action of the board will be reversed.
Cited 3 timesPublishedState ex rel. Love v. Board of Chosen Freeholders
35 N.J.L. 269 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1871
This litigation, at the last term, assumed the shape of a question which of two organizations was the legal board of chosen freeholders of Hudson county. That matter, in the case of The State, Feurey, relator, v. … Cited in State, Herder, pros., v. Collector, 7 Vr. 367 ; O’Donnell v. Dus man, 10 Vr. 684 . Ante p. 217.
Cited 2 timesPublishedEvesham Township Zoning Board of Adjustment v. Evesham Township Council
176 N.J. Super. 503 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 1980
One of the ways in which the Legislature sought to encourage coordination to lessen the cost of development of land was to provide that planning boards and zoning boards of adjustment have final authority in development matters … In Mountain Hill Prop. v. Tp.
Cited 4 timesPublishedTown of West Orange v. State Board of Tax Appeals
115 N.J.L. 396 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 26, 1935
The statutes creating and regulating the present state board of tax appeals, chapters 100 and 336 of the laws of 1931, give the board power to make reasonable rules and regulations governing appeals to it. … We are of the opinion that the board had jurisdiction to entertain the appeal. Points six and seven again argue that the judgment of the board went beyond its powers, but as stated above, we think it did not.
Cited 3 timesPublishedFejoku v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. of Am., Inc.
236 N.J. 69 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 16, 2018
Cited 0 timesPublishedLong Dock Co. v. Board of Equalization of Taxes
87 N.J.L. 22 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 23, 1915
The rule of law is thus stated in Jersey City v. Board of Assessors, 73 N. J. L. 164 (at p. 166) : “The proper method of assessment must be-determined by the nature of the title of defendants. … The nature of the right conveyed by a charter of this character is similar to that conveyed under- the Eiparian act, and the rule established bjr the Court of Errors- and Appeals in Polhemus v. Bateman, 60 N. J.
Cited 2 timesPublishedHenderson v. New Jersey Board of Examiners of Electrical Contractors
85 N.J. Super. 509 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 8, 1964
Moyant v. Paramus, 30 N. J. 528, 553 (1959) ; Ward v. Scott, 11 N. J. 117, 123 (1952); Greggio v. Orange, 69 N. J. Super. 453, 461 (Law Div. 1961), affirmed, o. b. sub non. Roselle v. East Orange, 37 N. J, 462 (1962). … Paramus, supra; revocation of a license “for cause,” In re Berardi, supra; “false, fraudulent, or misleading advertising,” Abelson's Inc. v. New Jersey Board of Optometrists, 5 N. J. 412, 422 (1950).
Cited 4 timesPublishedFairmount Hospital, Inc. v. State Board of Tax Appeals
123 N.J.L. 201 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 22, 1939
Cited 1 timesPublishedHackensack Water Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners
35 N.J. 239 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 30, 1961
Rockland County Anti-Reservoir Ass’n v. Duryea, 282 App. Div. 457 , 123 N. Y. S. 2d 445, 447 (App. Div. 1953). We agree the Board’s determination cannot be said to be unreasonable. … The Board’s treatment either assumes that Hackensack is bound by the inter-company contract to pay the higher sum despite the Board’s disallowance of the excess over $456,442, or that since the sum paid in the test year was
Cited 3 timesPublishedPublic Service Electric Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners
87 N.J.L. 128 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 27, 1915
Thereupon, the city appealed to the board of public utility commissioners, which board, after a hearing, made an order directing thé prosecutor to conform- to the duties imposed on it by the contract and to furnish free of … Co. v. Motley, 219 U. S. 485 .
Cited 9 timesPublishedKaveny v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF TOWN OF MONTCLAIR
36 N.J. 597 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 26, 1962
KAVENY, PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER, v. BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE TOWN OF MONTCLAIR, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. The Supreme Court of New Jersey. February 26, 1962. Mr. Francis F. Welsh for the petitioner. Mr.
Cited 1 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · May 11, 2023
Corp. v. … King v. Taylor, 694 F.3d 650, 659-61 (6th Cir. 2012).
Cited 0 timesUnknownState ex rel. Board of Water Commissioners v. Brewster
42 N.J.L. 125 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1880
Co. v. Commissioners, 3 Harr. 71 ; Townsend v. Brown, 4 Zab. 80, 89; Gay v. Harvey, 12 Vroom 39 ; also the first maxim of Vattel, (D war. on Stat., p. 126.) … The board was organized to regulate a certain municipal interest, in the same manner that a school board or a board of fire.commissioners regulates, or could be created to manage, the affairs of its respective department.
Cited 2 timesPublishedSaunders v. Toms River Regional Schools Board of Education
144 N.J. 371 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 2, 1996
Cited 1 timesPublishedBoard of Chosen Freeholders v. President of State Bank
38 N.J. Eq. 36 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1884
Cited 0 timesPublished
Ask Donna