Legal Opinion

Eaton v. City of Newark

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided March 26, 1925PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Pee Curiam.

In this matter no further statement of facts is necessary other than that application was made by relator to the superintendent of buildings of the city of Newark for a permit to erect thirty-two garages to house one automobile each, and such permit was refused, for the reason that such structures upon the premises of relator would he in violation of the zoning ordinance of the city. A hoard of adjustment exists in the city of Newark in pursuance of the terms of Pamph. L. 1924, ch. 146, and relator had not appealed to that board from the ruling or refusal of the superintendent of…

2Cited by4 opinions

  1. Andrews v. WalkerNew Mexico Supreme Court · 1955
  2. Gibbs Building, C., Co. v. BellevilleNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1926
  3. Dornbusch v. Board of Adjustment of NewarkNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1934
  4. Jorgensen v. Pennsylvania RailroadSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1958

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

Powered by the Exa API