Horowitz v. Civil Service Commission of N.J.

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Horowitz v. Civil Service Commission of N.J.

171 A. 779, 112 N.J.L. 499

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedApril 12, 1934

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 171 A. 779 (Horowitz v. Civil Service Commission of N.J.) 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

Horowitz v. Civil Service Commission of N.J., 171 A. 779, 112 N.J.L. 499 (N.J. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The judgments in these cases are affirmed, for the reasons set forth in the per curiam opinion filed in the Supreme Court, with the qualification that the act justifying the rejection of Reinhart was not chapter 298 of the laws of 1920, but chapter 52 of the laws of 1922, page 98, as amended by chapter 349 of the laws of 1929, page 784.

For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Teenchabd, Paekee, Lloyd, Hehek, Pekskie, Van Buskikk, Kays, Hetfield, Deaf, Wells, Dill, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Pee Cueiam.

The judgments in these cases are affirmed, for the reasons set forth in the per curiam opinion filed in the Supreme Court, with the qualification that the act justifying the rejection of Reinhart was not chapter 298 of the laws of 1920, but chapter 52 of the laws of 1922, page 98, as amended by chapter 349 of the laws of 1929, page 784.

For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Teenchabd, Paekee, Lloyd, Hehek, Pekskie, Van Buskikk, Kays, Hetfield, Deaf, Wells, Dill, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

171 A. 779, 112 N.J.L. 499, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/horowitz-v-civil-service-commission-of-nj-nj-1934.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack