of the Tax Act of 1918 did not, by implication, repeal the above-mentioned laws, upon which the complainant relies. Such repeals are not favored, and the provisions of the various statutes are not materially inconsistent.
The defendants, members of the Municipal Finance Commission, will be restrained from functioning in the borough of Runnemede, to the extent that such functioning may be inconsistent with the right of the complainant to enforce its execution in the manner herein stated.
The prayer to enjoin and restrain the assessors of said borough from assessing and levying the taxes, and the collector from collecting same, without including therein the amount of complainant's judgment is denied, as beyond the power of this court, as well as unnecessary in view of the relief granted on other prayers.
We are not construing the provisions of the Municipal Finance Commission Acts of the State of New Jersey, its constitutionality, or its effect, except as the stays therein contained affect the right of the complainant to enforce its judgment.
As to count 2, we have determined as a fact that the complainant has not produced sufficient evidence to satisfy the court that it should use the extraordinary remedy of injunction to restrain the members of the Municipal Finance Commission from functioning in the borough of Runnemede, and the conclusions as to count 1 of the complaint give ample and sufficient protection for the collection of the balance of the bonds owned by complainant.
The necessity for an injunction under count 3 appears to be moot, if the commission adheres to its present policy. However, it is apparent that settlement of taxes by the acceptance of bonds may materially interfere with the complainant in the collection of its judgment, and restraint will be granted enjoining the defendants from making settlement for taxes by any medium except in accordance with the laws of the State of New Jersey.
Count 4 is based upon, and asks for relief under, the Declaratory Judgment Act, Jud.Code, § 274d, as amended, 28 U.S.C.A. § 400. An examination of the cases indicates that the complainant has an "actual controversy," under the provisions of that act, and is entitled to a decree of similar character to that granted herein with relation to count 1, applicable to the remainder of complainant's bonds, if and when judgment may be entered thereon, or any portion thereof, in this court and execution issued.
Decree will be made in accordance with this opinion.
© 1992-2004 VersusLaw Inc.