Larkey v. City of Bayonne

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Larkey v. City of Bayonne

4 A.2d 500, 122 N.J.L. 167, 1939 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 214

DecidedMarch 2, 1939

StatusPublished

This text of 4 A.2d 500 (Larkey 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.

Bluebook

Larkey v. City of Bayonne, 4 A.2d 500, 122 N.J.L. 167, 1939 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 214 (N.J. 1939).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The chief justice allowed a rule to show cause, returnable before this court, why a writ of certiorari should not be allowed to review an ordinance entitled “An ordinance to repeal an ordinance entitled an ordinance to fix the duties and term of the Health Officer of the City of Bayonne, passed April 5th, 1938, or why such other writ or writs should not be issued to protect the applicant, Charles J. Larkey, in his office as Health Officer and from any interference with his term of office.”

It appears that the applicant occupies the office of health officer and was appointed for the term of five years, the term provided in the said ordinance of April 5th, 1938, and which was sought to be repealed as aforesaid. It further appears that the ordinance of repeal was duly adopted at a meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the city of Bayonne, held on January 5th, 1939.

Prom the affidavits before us we conclude that probable cause is shown why a writ should issue to review the said action of the respondents.

The writ will issue, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

The chief justice allowed a rule to show cause, returnable before this court, why a writ of certiorari should not be allowed to review an ordinance entitled “An ordinance to repeal an ordinance entitled an ordinance to fix the duties and term of the Health Officer of the City of Bayonne, passed April 5th, 1938, or why such other writ or writs should not be issued to protect the applicant, Charles J. Larkey, in his office as Health Officer and from any interference with his term of office.”

It appears that the applicant occupies the office of health officer and was appointed for the term of five years, the term provided in the said ordinance of April 5th, 1938, and which was sought to be repealed as aforesaid. It further appears that the ordinance of repeal was duly adopted at a meeting of the Board of Commissioners of the city of Bayonne, held on January 5th, 1939.

Prom the affidavits before us we conclude that probable cause is shown why a writ should issue to review the said action of the respondents.

The writ will issue, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

4 A.2d 500, 122 N.J.L. 167, 1939 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 214, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/larkey-v-city-of-bayonne-nj-1939.