City of Newark v. North Jersey District Water Supply Commission
255 A.2d 193, 54 N.J. 258, 1969 N.J. LEXIS 197
Opinion
The judgment is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion of Judge Mintz in the Chancery Division, 106 N. J. Super. 88.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weinxeaub and Justices Jacobs, Feancis, Peoctoe, Hall, Sohettino and HaneMAN - 7.
For reversal — Hone.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
City of Newark v. North Jersey District Water Supply Commission, 255 A.2d 193, 54 N.J. 258, 1969 N.J. LEXIS 197 (N.J. 1969).
255 A.2d 193 (City of Newark v. North Jersey District Water Supply Commission) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
McMahon v. City of Newark
951 A.2d 185 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2008)
Union Cnty. Util. Auth. v. Bergen Cnty. Util. Auth.
995 F. Supp. 506 (D. New Jersey, 1998)
Union County Utilities Authority v. Bergen County Utilities Authority
995 F. Supp. 506 (D. New Jersey, 1998)
Culver v. Insurance Co. of North America
559 A.2d 400 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1989)
Seitz v. Mark-O-Lite Sign Contractors, Inc.
510 A.2d 319 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1986)
Dept. of Pub. Advocate v. NJ Bd. of Pub. Ut.
503 A.2d 331 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1985)
City of New Brunswick v. Borough of Milltown
467 A.2d 591 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1983)
Dworman v. Mayor & Bd. of Aldermen, Etc., Morristown
370 F. Supp. 1056 (D. New Jersey, 1974)
Schiff v. Schiff
283 A.2d 131 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1971)
Kugler v. Romain
266 A.2d 144 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1970)
Porcelli v. Titus
261 A.2d 364 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1969)