Mason v. City of Paterson

303 A.2d 84, 62 N.J. 471, 1973 N.J. LEXIS 260
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided April 9, 1973·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Pur Curiam.

The (rial court held, among other things, that the statute establishing the form of government for the City of Paterson was unconstitutional. 120 N. J. Super. 184 .(Law Div. 1972).. On motion, we certified the appeals prior to consideration in the Appellate Division.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons given by the trial court. There is reserved to the trial court authority to amend the timetable in paragraphs 6, 7 and 8 of the judgment if circumstances shall so warrant.

For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintraub, Justices Jacobs, Proctor, Hall, Mountain and Sullivan and Judge Oonford — 7.

For reversal — Hone.

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

Mason v. City of Paterson, 303 A.2d 84, 62 N.J. 471, 1973 N.J. LEXIS 260 (N.J. 1973).

303 A.2d 84 (Mason v. City of Paterson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services
9 A.3d 882 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2010)
Newark Superior Officers Ass'n v. Newark
455 A.2d 81 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1982)
Kenney v. East Brunswick Tp.
410 A.2d 713 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1980)
Raybestos-Manhattan, Inc. v. Glaser
365 A.2d 1 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)
Toms River Affiliates v. DEPT., ENVIRON. PROTEC.
355 A.2d 679 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1976)