Legal Opinion

Hunter v. Mayor & Council of the Township of Teaneck

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided February 24, 1942PublishedCited by 20 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

Tlie opinion of the court was delivered by

Perskie, J.

The primary question requiring decision in this cause is whether the ordinance prohibiting the keeping of pin ball machines in any place of business in the Township of Teaneck, is ultra vires.

On March 18th, 1941, respondent Township of Teaneck passed an ordinance (No. 781) prohibiting the “keeping” of any “game of chance” or “gambling device” in any place of “business” within the municipality. N. J. S. A. 40:48-1 (¶ 6); 40:48-2.

Section 1 of the ordinance provides that any “game, machine, apparatus or device such as is commonly called…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. People Ex Rel. Ellison v. . LavinNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
  2. State v. MurzdaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1936
  3. State Ex Rel. Dussault v. KilburnMontana Supreme Court · 1941
  4. Commonwealth v. PlissnerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1936
  5. Pfister Chemical Co. v. RomanoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1937

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

3Cited by20 opinions

  1. Poppen v. WalkerSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
  2. Houman v. Mayor & Coun. Bor. Pompton LakesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
  3. State v. WileySupreme Court of Iowa · 1942
  4. Baedaro v. CaldwellNebraska Supreme Court · 1953
  5. Pepple v. HeadrickIdaho Supreme Court · 1942

15 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