Carroll v. City of Bayonne
This text of 124 A. 613 (Carroll v. City of Bayonne) 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.
Opinion
The judgments under review should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Supreme Court, but with this comment: The fact that the old board was still in existence as a de jure board, precludes any sound legal theory that the incoming board was a de facto board at the time it assumed authority to act. The judgments are affirmed, with costs.
For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Mintuen, Kalisch, Black, Katzenbaoh, Campbell, Gardner, Van Buskirk, Clark, JJ. 10.
For reversal — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
124 A. 613, 99 N.J.L. 493, 14 Gummere 493, 1924 N.J. LEXIS 168, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/carroll-v-city-of-bayonne-nj-1924.