Doyle v. Mayor & Council of Secaucus

163 A. 893, 110 N.J.L. 62, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 429
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 6, 1933·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment under review herein will be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court. However, that opinion in citing the statute of 1911, page 444, omits to note that the statute in forbidding the abolition of a position or office held by an exempt fireman, by the last clause in section 3, limits that inhibition to cases where the reduction is “for the purpose of terminating the service of any such exempt fireman.” In the present case,, there was clearly no such purpose, as found by the Supreme Court; and the absence of that purpose is an essential ground for the judgment of the Supreme Court and for the affirmance here.

For affirmance— The Chancellor, Parker, Lloyd, Case, Bodine, Brogan, Heher, Kays, Heteield, Wells, Kerney, JJ. 11.

For reversal — None.

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

Doyle v. Mayor & Council of Secaucus, 163 A. 893, 110 N.J.L. 62, 1933 N.J. LEXIS 429 (N.J. 1933).

163 A. 893 (Doyle v. Mayor & Council of Secaucus) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Roe v. Borough of Upper Saddle River
765 A.2d 779 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2001)