Vallencourt v. Toohey

15 A.2d 609, 125 N.J.L. 365, 1940 N.J. LEXIS 341
CourtSupreme Court of New Jersey
DecidedOctober 10, 1940
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 15 A.2d 609 (Vallencourt v. Toohey) 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
Vallencourt v. Toohey, 15 A.2d 609, 125 N.J.L. 365, 1940 N.J. LEXIS 341 (N.J. 1940).

Opinion

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Bodine, J.

This case is before us upon a moulded record. The respondent, who had received compensation payments under the statute (N. J. S. A. 34:15-1, et seq.) was placed on the so-called one per cent, fund more than two years after the last compensation payment had been made. After the decision in Ruffin v. Albright, 131 N. J. L. 434; affirmed, 134 Id. 499, he was deprived of such benefits. This we deem improper, since N. J. S. A. 34:15-95 preserved such rights to those who had received benefits from the fund. Since it was well within the legislative powers to direct the distribution of the fund those designated must receive the benefits even though the initial payment may have been improper. The legislative command is as to those who had received benefits.

The case will be remanded to the Supreme Court to the end that a peremptory writ of mandamus issue.

For affirmance — Tub Chancellor, Chiee Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ibr, Perskie, Porter, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Hague, JJ. 13.

For reversal — None.

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

Related

Salter v. Toohey
15 A.2d 776 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
15 A.2d 609, 125 N.J.L. 365, 1940 N.J. LEXIS 341, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vallencourt-v-toohey-nj-1940.