Legal Opinion

In Re the Suspension or Revocation of the License of Fichner

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 18, 1996PublishedCited by 21 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

The opinion of the court was delivered by

O’HERN, J.

This appeal primarily concerns the de facto officer doctrine. This common-law doctrine typically holds valid the acts of a person exercising the duties of a public office under the color of authority if the acts are in the interests of the public and third persons. In this case, because three members of an occupational licensing board lacked the statutory qualifications for exercise of the office and another had not heard any of the evidence at the relevant disciplinary proceedings, the Appellate Division ordered the proceedings to commence…

2Cases cited24 opinions

  1. Glidden Co. v. ZdanokSupreme Court of the United States · 1962
  2. Morgan v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1936
  3. Ryder v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1995
  4. Clowes v. Terminix International, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
  5. State v. CarrollSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1871

19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by21 opinions

  1. Casamasino v. City of Jersey CitySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1999
  2. Consumer Protection Division v. MorganCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 2005
  3. Biondi v. NassimosNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1997
  4. Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, and Iowa Water Environment AssociationSupreme Court of Iowa · 2014
  5. Costantino v. New Jersey Merit System Board & Division of Motor VehiclesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1998

16 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API