Campbell Stores v. Mayor of Hoboken

169 A. 681, 115 N.J. Eq. 159, 1934 N.J. LEXIS 740
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 5, 1934·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

• The decree below will be affirmed, and, except for the following modifications, for the reasons stated in the opinion filed by the vice-chancellor.

The vice-chancellor, near the close of his opinion, speaks of the express dedication of 1908 and of the fence erected in 1926. We consider that the express dedication of other lands *165 in 1908, executed jointly by complainant’s predecessor in title and the railway company, was, actually or potentially, an entirely different transaction from, and with no bearing upon, the use of the footpath and does not repel the presumption of an implied dedication. We further consider that the rights of the public in the sidewalk had become established prior to the erecting of the fence in 1926 and that therefore that erection has no legal effect upon the present controversy.

For affirmance — The Chief-Justice, Trenchard, Par-, ker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Donges, Heher, Peeskie, Van Buskirk, Kays, Hetfield, Dear, Wells, Dill, JJ. 15.

For reversal — None.

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

Campbell Stores v. Mayor of Hoboken, 169 A. 681, 115 N.J. Eq. 159, 1934 N.J. LEXIS 740 (N.J. 1934).

169 A. 681 (Campbell Stores v. Mayor of Hoboken) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Koch v. Borough of Seaside Heights
122 A.2d 250 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1956)
Lower Tp. v. Reeves
81 A.2d 513 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1951)
Atlantic City Transp. Co. v. Walsh
71 A.2d 126 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1950)