Sterling v. City of Camden

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Sterling v. City of Camden

46 A. 781, 65 N.J.L. 190, 1900 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 69

DecidedJune 25, 1900

StatusPublished

This text of 46 A. 781 (Sterling v. City of Camden) 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

Sterling v. City of Camden, 46 A. 781, 65 N.J.L. 190, 1900 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 69 (N.J. 1900).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cubiam.

The decision of this cause has been held awaiting the disposition by the Court of Errors and Appeals of the case of Doran v. Camden, 35 Vroom 666. The result of that disposition, at March Term, 1900, leads to the determination in the present cause that the ordinance under review is not invalidated by the separable provision that, on failure of a person convicted of a violation of the ordinance to pay a fine, the magistrate shall commit him to the county jail for ten days. 'That provision is itself invalid unless it may be held to be a limitation on the charter direction that a commitment for failure to pay a fine for violation of an ordinance shall be until the fine and costs are paid. We do not wish to foreclose •the opportunity of defendant to argue in favor of that contention, and, therefore, will not annul this separable provi,-sion. Its effect may be considered whenever any offender [191]*191shall, after the expiration of ten days, apply for release, notwithstanding failure to pay fine and costs.

This disposition is not unfavorable to the present prosecutor, who has arrested a summary proceeding against him by a certiorari of the ordinance on which it is based.

The certiorari, therefore, will be dismissed, but without •costs.

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

Pee Cubiam.

The decision of this cause has been held awaiting the disposition by the Court of Errors and Appeals of the case of Doran v. Camden, 35 Vroom 666. The result of that disposition, at March Term, 1900, leads to the determination in the present cause that the ordinance under review is not invalidated by the separable provision that, on failure of a person convicted of a violation of the ordinance to pay a fine, the magistrate shall commit him to the county jail for ten days. 'That provision is itself invalid unless it may be held to be a limitation on the charter direction that a commitment for failure to pay a fine for violation of an ordinance shall be until the fine and costs are paid. We do not wish to foreclose •the opportunity of defendant to argue in favor of that contention, and, therefore, will not annul this separable provi,-sion. Its effect may be considered whenever any offender [191]*191shall, after the expiration of ten days, apply for release, notwithstanding failure to pay fine and costs.

This disposition is not unfavorable to the present prosecutor, who has arrested a summary proceeding against him by a certiorari of the ordinance on which it is based.

The certiorari, therefore, will be dismissed, but without •costs.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

46 A. 781, 65 N.J.L. 190, 1900 N.J. Sup. Ct. LEXIS 69, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sterling-v-city-of-camden-nj-1900.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack