Vallencourt v. Toohey
Cases that cite this one
1 later published case cites this decision.
- Salter v. Toohey (N.J. 1940)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
This case is before us upon a moulded record. The respondent, who had received compensation payments under the statute (N. J. S. A. 34:15-1, et seq.) was placed on the so-called one per cent, fund more than two years after the last compensation payment had been made. After the decision in Ruffin v. Albright, 131 N. J. L. 434; affirmed, 134 Id. 499, he was deprived of such benefits. This we deem improper, since N. J. S. A. 34:15-95 preserved such rights to those who had received benefits from the fund. Since it was well within the legislative powers to direct the distribution of the fund those designated must receive the benefits even though the initial payment may have been improper. The legislative command is as to those who had received benefits.
The case will be remanded to the Supreme Court to the end that a peremptory writ of mandamus issue.
For affirmance — Tub Chancellor, Chiee Justice, Case, Bodine, Donges, Hei-ibr, Perskie, Porter, Dear, Wells, WolesKeil, Raeeerty, Hague, JJ. 13.
For reversal — None.
Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.