Mercer Council 4, New Jersey Civil Service Ass'n v. Alloway
Cases that cite this one
16 later published cases cite this decision.
- Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human Services (N.J. 2010)
- In re the Adoption of Amendments to N.J.A.C. 6:11-8.4 & N.J.A.C. 6:11-8.5 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1991)
- Santaniello v. DEPT. OF HEALTH (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2010)
- New Jersey Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. New Jersey Department of Agriculture (N.J. 2008)
- In re Pathmark Stores, Inc. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2004)
- Mutschler v. DEPT. OF ENVIR. PROTECTION (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2001)
- Mutschler v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2001)
- Passaic County v. Dibella Sanitation (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994)
- Coons v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc. (N.J. 1984)
- IN THE MATTER OF CHANGES IN THE STATE CLASSIFICATION PLAN, COMMUNICATIONS OPERATOR, DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019)
- Essex County Corrections Officers Pba Local No. 382 v. County of Essex (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014)
- Rutherford Education Ass'n v. Board of Education (N.J. 1985)
- Remedial Educ. & Diag. v. Essex Cty. Educ. Ser. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1983)
- Remedial Education & Diagnostic Services, Inc. v. Essex County Educational Services Commission (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1983)
- In re Applications of North Jersey Dist. Water Supply Com'n (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1980)
- Costanzo v. NJ RACING COMM. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1974)
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
The Appellate Division, in an opinion reported in 119 N. J. Super. 94, held that an amendment of N. J. A. C. 4:1—3.8 adopted by the Civil Service Commission was an improper exercise of its rule-making power and was invalid. 1 However, it also held that no administrative action theretofore taken pursuant to the amendment, or which might be taken within 45 days from the filing of the Appellate Division opinion, would be deemed invalid. We granted cross-petitions for certification, 61 N. J. 157 (1972), and also granted the Civil Service Commission’s motion for a stay of the Appellate Division judgment.
*518 We affirm the decision of the Appellate Division for the reasons expressed in its filed opinion. The basis on which the Appellate Division upheld administrative action taken pursuant to the rule was “substantial administrative reliance upon it to date.” The same rationale is equally applicable to any further administrative action taken by virtue of the stay issued by this court.
Affirmed.
Judge Conford disqualified.
For affirmance — Chief Justice Weintraub, Justices Jacobs, Proctor, Hall and Mountain, and Judge Sullivan — -6.
For reversal — None.
The amendment empowered the Chief Examiner and Secretary of the Civil Service Commission “to assign to state agencies on a one year trial basis ending July 1, 1972 duties relating to classification programs * * * and promotional examinations in state service.”
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.