State v. Friedman
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
1Per curiam
Defendants Marvin J. Friedman and his wife Marsha Friedman appeal from their convictions after a trial de novo in the Law Division of violations of Washington Township’s anti-noise ordinance on eight separate occasions when their dog’s barking awakened their neighbor between the hours of 6:12 and 6:44 a.m. The Law Division Judge imposed the same $40 fine for each violation, totaling $320, as had the Municipal Court.
On appeal, the Friedmans make the following arguments:
I. As it was applied to these defendants, Washington Township’s Anti-Noise Ordinance is unconstitutionally subjective and…
2Cases cited12 opinions
- Connally v. General Construction Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1926
- Coates v. City of CincinnatiSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Palmer v. City of EuclidSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- State v. CameronSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1985
- State v. SmithSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1966
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by3 opinions
- State v. Clarksburg InnNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2005
- Town of Baldwin v. CarterSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 2002
- State v. TaylorCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1998