Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

McCarthy v. Walter

Decided: November 15, 1930.

JAMES W. MCCARTHY ET AL., RELATORS,
v.
ADOLPH WALTER, LUCIUS H. DONOHOE, HENRY J. LEMMER AND THEODORE H. SMITH, DEFENDANTS; JAMES W. MCCARTHY ET AL., RELATORS, V. THEODORE A. KLEFFMAN, JOHN G. MEISTER AND FRANK B. CHAPMAN, DEFENDANTS



On quo warranto.

For the relators, J. Raymond Tiffany.

For the defendants Walter, Donohoe, Lemmer and Smith, Edward J. O'Mara (J. Emil Walscheid, of counsel).

For the defendants Kleffman, Meister and Chapman, J. Emil Walscheid.

Before Gummere, Chief Justice, and Justices Trenchard and Lloyd.

Lloyd

The opinion of the court was delivered by

LLOYD, J. Information in the nature of quo warranto was filed in each of the above entitled cases by the relators, the one to obtain possession of the offices claimed to be held by the defendants Walter, Donohoe, Lemmer and Smith as members of the Hudson county Park commission; the other

to obtain like possession of offices claimed to be held by the defendants Kleffman, Meister and Chapman as members of the Hudson county boulevard commission. To the informations filed the defendants responded by pleas setting up sundry grounds upon which the claims of the relators were resisted, and to these pleas the relators have demurred.

For more than a quarter of a century there has existed in Hudson county a boulevard commission created by statutes enacted in 1888 and 1898 under which vast properties and franchises have come into possession of the commissioners and been since administered by them. The park commission was created in 1902 and it likewise has had control and the management of properties of great value and has ever since administered the duties of the office.

On April 22d, in the present year, the legislature enacted legislation looking to the consolidation of both commissions in a single body and passed the acts known as chapters 260, 261 and 262 of the laws of 1930.

Chapter 260 reads as follows (Pamph. L. 1930, p. 1092):

"An act to abolish the offices of county park commissioners created by an act entitled 'An act to establish public parks in certain counties of this state, and to regulate the same,' ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.