State ex rel. O'Connor v. Neidhammer

Supreme Court of New Jersey

State ex rel. O'Connor v. Neidhammer

159 A. 90, 10 N.J. Misc. 318, 1932 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 240

DecidedMarch 2, 1932

StatusPublished

This text of 159 A. 90 (State ex rel. O'Connor v. Neidhammer) 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

State ex rel. O'Connor v. Neidhammer, 159 A. 90, 10 N.J. Misc. 318, 1932 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 240 (N.J. 1932).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This rule to show cause seeks the consent to the filing of an information in the nature of a quo warranto to test the right of the defendant to the office of councilman of the borough of Fairview, in Bergen county.

We have carefully considered the record submitted and the reasons urged by relator, and they do not persuade us that the discretion of the court should be exercised in favor of granting the leave sought.

The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.

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

Per Curiam.

This rule to show cause seeks the consent to the filing of an information in the nature of a quo warranto to test the right of the defendant to the office of councilman of the borough of Fairview, in Bergen county.

We have carefully considered the record submitted and the reasons urged by relator, and they do not persuade us that the discretion of the court should be exercised in favor of granting the leave sought.

The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

159 A. 90, 10 N.J. Misc. 318, 1932 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 240, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-oconnor-v-neidhammer-nj-1932.