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.

In re District Inheritance Tax Supervisors

New Jersey Supreme Court


Decided: April 24, 1972.

IN THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICT INHERITANCE TAX SUPERVISORS, HAY REPORT APPEAL. IN THE MATTER OF STATE COLLEGE LIBRARIANS, I AND II, 10 MONTHS AND 12 MONTHS -- HAY REPORT APPEAL. NICHOLAS C. MAIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SERVICE, RESPONDENT. ROBERT MICAI, WILLIAM BROWN, ORVILLE ABBOTT, GEORGE HUTCHINSON, JOSEPH R. SMITH, JOHN SHANER AND HENRY JUSTUS, APPELLANTS, V. NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, RESPONDENT. IN THE MATTER OF THE PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATION, NEW JERSEY STATE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, REPRESENTING CERTAIN PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEES IN THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION -- HAY REPORT APPEAL. ROBERT J. BERISH, ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. JOHN J. FARRELL, CHIEF EXAMINER AND SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SERVICE, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT. HYMAN S. ABRAMSON, ET AL., APPELLANTS, V. JOHN J. FARRELL, CHIEF EXAMINER AND SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF CIVIL SERVICE, STATE OF NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT. ELIZABETH MCLAUGHLIN, APPELLANT, V. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT

Motion to dismiss denied and remanded -- Chief Justice Weintraub and Justices Jacobs, Francis, Proctor, Hall, Schettino and Mountain. Opposed -- None.

Per Curiam

[60 NJ Page 374]

The motions to dismiss are denied and the causes are remanded to the Appellate Division for further proceedings. See In re Senior Appeals Examiners, 60 N.J. 356 (1972).

During oral argument we were advised that some of the appellants are attacking the Commission's determinations in the federal district court as well as here. Such simultaneous proceedings entail litigious vexation and harassment; beyond that they entail the wastage of judicial facilities and reflect adversely on judicial administration. Since the moving papers before us do not seek any pertinent relief we need not now pursue the matter. However, we note that if hereafter active steps are taken towards the simultaneous prosecution of the proceedings in both courts the Attorney General may readily move for a suitable stay or such other relief as may be appropriate. See Devlin v. National Broadcasting Co., Inc., 47 N.J. 126 (1966); Mennonna v. Penna. R. Co., 5 N.J. Misc. 233 (Sup. Ct. 1927); Amdur v. Lizars, 372 F.2d 103 (4 Cir. 1967); Mottolese v. Kaufman, 176 F.2d 301 (2 Cir. 1949); Note, "Stays of Federal Proceedings in Deference to Concurrently Pending State Court Suits," 60 Colum. L. Rev. 684 (1960); Vestal, "Repetitive Litigation," 45 Iowa L. Rev. 525 (1960); Note, "Power to Stay Federal Proceedings Pending Termination of Concurrent State Litigation," 59 Yale L.J. 978 (1950).

19720424


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.