Carling v. Mayor of Hoboken

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Carling v. Mayor of Hoboken

44 A. 950, 64 N.J.L. 223, 35 Vroom 223, 1899 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 3

DecidedNovember 27, 1899

StatusPublished

This text of 44 A. 950 (Carling v. Mayor of Hoboken) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Carling v. Mayor of Hoboken, 44 A. 950, 64 N.J.L. 223, 35 Vroom 223, 1899 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 3 (N.J. 1899).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The tax ordinance was approved June 29th, 1899, and under it taxes were assessed and confirmed October 5th, 1899. The rule for certiorari was not applied for until October 7th, 1899. We think it was then too late to review the ordinance for the purpose of setting aside any of its provisions, and that, if illegal taxes have been levied under it, individual taxpayers must be left to seek their own personal remedies.

The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The tax ordinance was approved June 29th, 1899, and under it taxes were assessed and confirmed October 5th, 1899. The rule for certiorari was not applied for until October 7th, 1899. We think it was then too late to review the ordinance for the purpose of setting aside any of its provisions, and that, if illegal taxes have been levied under it, individual taxpayers must be left to seek their own personal remedies.

The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

44 A. 950, 64 N.J.L. 223, 35 Vroom 223, 1899 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 3, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carling-v-mayor-of-hoboken-nj-1899.