Williams v. BD. OF EDUC. OF TP. OF DEPTFORD

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Williams v. BD. OF EDUC. OF TP. OF DEPTFORD

486 A.2d 846, 98 N.J. 319, 1985 N.J. LEXIS 2222

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided January 28, 1985·Published·Cited by 11 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 192 N.J.Super. 31 (1983). The dissenting opinion below did not address the Appellate Division majority’s dictum that the Board of Education should be permitted to recoup moneys paid to appellant because of an erroneous interpretation of N.J.S.A. 18A:30-2.1. That issue is therefore not before us, see R. 2:2-1(a)(2), and we express no view on it.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN and GARIBALDI — 6.

For reversal — None.

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

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 192 N.J.Super. 31 (1983). The dissenting opinion below did not address the Appellate Division majority’s dictum that the Board of Education should be permitted to recoup moneys paid to appellant because of an erroneous interpretation of N.J.S.A. 18A:30-2.1. That issue is therefore not before us, see R. 2:2-1(a)(2), and we express no view on it.

For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN and GARIBALDI — 6.

For reversal — None.

Williams v. BD. OF EDUC. OF TP. OF DEPTFORD, 486 A.2d 846, 98 N.J. 319, 1985 N.J. LEXIS 2222 (N.J. 1985).

Pincite

486 A.2d 846 (Williams v. BD. OF EDUC. OF TP. OF DEPTFORD) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related