Heetner v. City of Newark

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Heetner v. City of Newark

169 A. 280, 11 N.J. Misc. 853, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 64

DecidedOctober 17, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A. 280 (Heetner v. City of Newark) 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

Heetner v. City of Newark, 169 A. 280, 11 N.J. Misc. 853, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 64 (N.J. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We are clear that a writ should be allowed. It may be presented accordingly.

Counsel have apparently stipulated that in case of allowance the court shall proceed and decide the case as on final hearing on briefs to be furnished by the respective parties. However, we cannot accede to this method of disposition, particularly as no brief has been submitted for the city, and we are not apprised that counsel for the city consent that the conviction in question be set aside.

Let a writ issue and return in the usual course.

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

Per Curiam.

We are clear that a writ should be allowed. It may be presented accordingly.

Counsel have apparently stipulated that in case of allowance the court shall proceed and decide the case as on final hearing on briefs to be furnished by the respective parties. However, we cannot accede to this method of disposition, particularly as no brief has been submitted for the city, and we are not apprised that counsel for the city consent that the conviction in question be set aside.

Let a writ issue and return in the usual course.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A. 280, 11 N.J. Misc. 853, 1933 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 64, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/heetner-v-city-of-newark-nj-1933.