Ingersoll v. Village of South Orange
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Opinion of the Court
Pee Curiam.
This matter was previously before this court upon a rule to show cause why an alternative or peremptory writ of mandamus should not issue. Ingersoll v. South Orange et al., 2 N. J. Misc. R. 882. Therein this court held that the case fell within the principle of the Nutley ease (Ignaciunas v. Risley, 98 N. J. L. 712); Handy v. South Orange, 118 Atl. Rep. 838, and Vernon v. Westfield, 1 N. J. Adv. R. 1031, and other cases, and “upon the reasoning underlying those cases we think the ordinance was outside of the powers conferred by the Zoning act, under the principle of the Nutley…
2Cited by7 opinions
- Hendlin v. Fairmount Construction Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1950
- Township of Springfield v. BensleyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1952
- State Ex Rel. Modern Lumber & Millwork Co. v. MacDuffWashington Supreme Court · 1931
- Blum Building Co. v. IngersollNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
- Nalitt v. Millburn Tp.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.