Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Mayor of Vailsburgh

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Mayor of Vailsburgh, 68 N.J.L. 311 (N.J. 1902)
53 A. 388; 1902 N.J. LEXIS 164
Adams, Affirmance, Boggs, Collins, Defendants, Dixon, Error, Garrison, Hendrickson, Pitney, Reversal, Voorhees, Woodruff, Yredenburgi, Yroom

Suburban Land Improvement Co. v. Mayor of Vailsburgh

Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was-delivered by

Garrison, J.

The substance of this litigation is set out in the opinion delivered in the Supreme Court. 38 Vroom 461. That opinion disposes of the only issues presented by the reasons assigned by the prosecutor for the annulment of the *312ordinance in question, which, were that the defendants had not the power to require- the construction of a sidewalk where one- already existed, and that to do so in the present case was an unreasonable exercise of such power. The first is a decision upon matter of law, in which we concur; the' second is a finding of fact, by which we are bound.

Whether the ordinance was void for uncertainty in the de-' seription of the work that it imposed in the first instance upon the prosecutor was not dealt with in the court below, .and cannot be decided here, because it is not covered by any of the reasons that were assigned. The judgment of the Supreme- Court is affirmed,, with costs.

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Dixon, Garrison, Collins, Hendrickson, Pitney, Voorhees. ' 8. For reversal—Adams, Yredenburgi-i, Yroom. 3.

Reference

Full Case Name
THE SUBURBAN LAND IMPROVEMENT COMPANY AND REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES, IN ERROR v. THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE BOROUGH OF VAILSBURGH, IN THE COUNTY OF ESSEX, IN ERROR
Status
Published