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.

Kurinsky v. Board of Health of Township of Lakewood

Decided: March 2, 1942.

LOUIS KURINSKY, PROSECUTOR,
v.
BOARD OF HEALTH OF THE TOWNSHIP OF LAKEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, WILLIAM THOMAS, DR. RAYMOND A. TAYLOR, ALBERT HOLMAN, WILLIAM SCHAUFFLER, WILLIAM CURTIS, EDWARD WOEHR, MEMBERS, AND GRACE E. MARGERUM, SUPERVISOR OF HEALTH AND CLERK OF THE BOARD, DEFENDANTS



On certiorari.

For the prosecutor, Milton R. Konvitz (Robert I. Morris, of counsel).

For the defendants, Milton Miller.

Before Justices Bodine, Perskie and Porter.

Porter

The opinion of the court was delivered by

PORTER, J. This writ brings before us for review the action, orders and resolutions of the Board of Health of the Township of Lakewood (hereinafter called Lakewood) in cancelling a poultry slaughtering permit theretofore issued to prosecutor and the ordinance of the said board known as

section 92 of the Sanitary Code. This ordinance was adopted January 27th, 1930. Section 92 reads as follows:

"No person, or persons, corporation, or corporations, shall slaughter and kill any cattle, any chickens, ducks, geese, pigeons, and any other domestic fowl, except for domestic or family use, and not for hotel or commercial use, within the limits of the Town, unless a permit is first had and obtained from the Board."

It appears that the prosecutor has been engaged in the poultry business at premises owned by him at 431 Clifton Avenue, Lakewood, for about seventeen years. Having been advised that he was violating the ordinance in slaughtering poultry without a permit he applied for one and obtained it under date of January 12th, 1933. Before it was issued he was required to make, and did make, certain structural changes in his premises to comply with the instructions of the Board of Health as to proper sanitary practice. The permit was issued for a period of one month and was renewed from month to month until September 1st, 1941, when further renewal was denied after due notice of the contemplated action had been given. These renewals were not continuous. The record is not clear as to exactly what interruptions there were but it appears that there were at least two periods when the renewals were denied, once for about six months and another for about four months, apparently due to his failure to comply with the sanitary requirements. In addition to section 92 of the ordinance above quoted it appears that other and more detailed rules and regulations concerning the slaughtering and housing of poultry were adopted by the Board of Health on January 13th, 1932, of which prosecutor was fully informed from time to time especially when inspections of his premises were made by both local and State Department of Health officials.

The proofs abundantly support the action of the respondent Board of Health in cancelling prosecutor's permit to slaughter poultry because of his failure to observe the provisions of the ordinance and its rules and regulations.

Local boards of health are given wide powers to safeguard the public health generally and among ...


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.