McCloskey v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

134 A. 923, 4 N.J. Misc. 832, 1926 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 105
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedOctober 7, 1926
StatusPublished

This text of 134 A. 923 (McCloskey v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners) 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
McCloskey v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners, 134 A. 923, 4 N.J. Misc. 832, 1926 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 105 (N.J. 1926).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

A rule to show cause was allowed by the court, why a writ of certiorari should not be allowed to review a decision by the board of public utility commissioners, dated January 12th, 1926. Our examination of the record and the briefs, filed in this case, lead us to, the same conclusion as that of the board of public utility commissioners. The primary questions involved are pure questions of fact, one of which is, whether the prosecutor, Harry McCloskey, was operating an auto bus with the consent of the municipal authorities.

The rule to show cause is discharged.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
134 A. 923, 4 N.J. Misc. 832, 1926 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 105, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mccloskey-v-board-of-public-utility-commissioners-nj-1926.