West Shore Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

Supreme Court of New Jersey

West Shore Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

169 A. 829, 112 N.J.L. 83, 1934 N.J. LEXIS 221

DecidedJanuary 5, 1934

StatusPublished

This text of 169 A. 829 (West Shore Railroad 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

West Shore Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners, 169 A. 829, 112 N.J.L. 83, 1934 N.J. LEXIS 221 (N.J. 1934).

Pincite

Opinion

Pee Cueiam.

The question before the Supreme Court was whether, to quote the language of the opinion of that court, the board in adopting the crossing plan called “P-5 revised” instead of plan “B-2,” made a determination not reasonably supported by the evidence, or that its order was unreasonable and in violation of prosecutors’ rights. That question the Supreme Court decided in the negative. It was essentially a question of fact, and determined on the voluminous and to some extent contradictory evidence. The finding of the Supreme Court was substantially supported by evidence, and such a finding, on well settled rules, is controlling here.

The judgment of the Supreme Court is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Teenchaed, Paekee, Lloyd, Case, Hehee, Peeskie, Yah Buskikk, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, Dill, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

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

Pee Cueiam.

The question before the Supreme Court was whether, to quote the language of the opinion of that court, the board in adopting the crossing plan called “P-5 revised” instead of plan “B-2,” made a determination not reasonably supported by the evidence, or that its order was unreasonable and in violation of prosecutors’ rights. That question the Supreme Court decided in the negative. It was essentially a question of fact, and determined on the voluminous and to some extent contradictory evidence. The finding of the Supreme Court was substantially supported by evidence, and such a finding, on well settled rules, is controlling here.

The judgment of the Supreme Court is therefore affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Teenchaed, Paekee, Lloyd, Case, Hehee, Peeskie, Yah Buskikk, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, Dill, JJ. 14.

For reversal — None.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

169 A. 829, 112 N.J.L. 83, 1934 N.J. LEXIS 221, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/west-shore-railroad-v-board-of-public-utility-commissioners-nj-1934.