Boon Bros. v. Noonburg

153 A. 98, 9 N.J. Misc. 138, 1931 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 464
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 21, 1931·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pee Cukiam.

An application was made by petition to compel obedience to a peremptory writ of mandamus issued out of and under the seal of the court on October 20th, 1930. Proceedings to punish for contempt for disobedience of a writ of mandamus are by attachment, rule to show cause, or other process, and the proceedings are governed by the rules applicable in contempt proceedings generally. 38 O. J. 939. The practice in this state is to issue and serve personally a rule to show cause why the respondent should not be attached for contempt. Brown v. Rahway, 53 N. J. L. 156, 161. See, also, Butler Co. v. Pittsburg, &c., 298 Pa. 347; 148 Atl. Rep. 504.

A rule to show cause will issue on petition filed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Boon Bros. v. Noonburg, 153 A. 98, 9 N.J. Misc. 138, 1931 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 464 (N.J. 1931).

153 A. 98 (Boon Bros. v. Noonburg) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Essex County Board of Taxation v. City of Newark
372 A.2d 607 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1977)
ESSEX CTY. BD. OF TAXATION v. City of Newark
353 A.2d 535 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
In re Stoner
133 F.2d 696 (Third Circuit, 1943)