Nisivoccia v. City of Newark

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Nisivoccia v. City of Newark

291 A.2d 143, 60 N.J. 499, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 264

CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey

DecidedJune 5, 1972

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 291 A.2d 143 (Nisivoccia 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

Nisivoccia v. City of Newark, 291 A.2d 143, 60 N.J. 499, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 264 (N.J. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Ctjbiam.

This is a suit to recover compensation for overtime work by a former Newark policeman. Plaintiff prevailed in part and on the City’s appeal the Appellate Division affirmed in an unreported opinion. We granted the City’s petition for certification. 59 N. J. 294 (1971). Thereafter a city ordinance was discovered which had provided for overtime pay in excess of the sum here involved. Plaintiff agrees he was paid that larger sum, although he says he did not understand that it represented compensation for overtime. His counsel agrees that these facts undercut the claim. We therefore do not reach the issues considered by the Appellate Division. The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter judgment for defendant. No costs for any party in any court.

For reversal—Chief Justice Weintbaub and Justices Ebancis, Peoctob, Hall and Mountain—5.

For affirmance—None.

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

Pee Ctjbiam.

This is a suit to recover compensation for overtime work by a former Newark policeman. Plaintiff prevailed in part and on the City’s appeal the Appellate Division affirmed in an unreported opinion. We granted the City’s petition for certification. 59 N. J. 294 (1971). Thereafter a city ordinance was discovered which had provided for overtime pay in excess of the sum here involved. Plaintiff agrees he was paid that larger sum, although he says he did not understand that it represented compensation for overtime. His counsel agrees that these facts undercut the claim. We therefore do not reach the issues considered by the Appellate Division. The judgment of the Appellate Division is reversed and the matter is remanded to the trial court with directions to enter judgment for defendant. No costs for any party in any court.

For reversal—Chief Justice Weintbaub and Justices Ebancis, Peoctob, Hall and Mountain—5.

For affirmance—None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 A.2d 143, 60 N.J. 499, 1972 N.J. LEXIS 264, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/nisivoccia-v-city-of-newark-nj-1972.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack