Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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

Klok v. Borough of Hawthorne

New Jersey Supreme Court


Decided: August 17, 1938.

JAMES VANDER KLOK, COMPLAINANT,
v.
BOROUGH OF HAWTHORNE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT

On rule to show cause why an alternative writ of mandamus should not issue.

For the complainant, Max P. Arlt (William V. Rosenkrans, of counsel).

For the respondent, Francis Caminetti.

Before Justices Trenchard, Parker and Perskie.

[120 NJL Page 534]

PER CURIAM.

This is complainant's rule to show cause why an alternative writ of mandamus should not issue, directing respondent to apply for commissioners to fix compensation and damages for land taken for the widening of Rock road between Goffle road and Lincoln avenue, in the borough of Hawthorne, in accordance with the provisions of an ordinance of the borough.

The depositions laid before us show that the facts are in substantial dispute and that the legal right to a mandamus is not clear. In such case an alternative writ only will be awarded, and accordingly the rule to show cause in this case will be made absolute. Hugg v. Camden, 39 N.J.L. 620; Schnitzler v. New York Transportation Co., 76 Id. 171.

19380817


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

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