Crossan v. Ventnor City
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On certiorari. An ordinance of Ventnor City passed under Pamph. L. 1894, p. 146, is sought to be set aside on two grounds—first, because the interior line of the public park laid out by said ordinance is below low-water mark, and second, because the statute under which the ordinance was passed is unconstitutional.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Garrison, J.
In Seaside Realty Co. v. Atlantic City, 45 Vroom 178, we held that this supplemental act was not unconstitutional because its object was not expressed in its title or because it was a special law regulating the internal affairs of cities. This decision was affirmed and the opinion of this court adopted by the Court of Errors and Appeals. 47 Id. 819.
More recently in the case of Fishblatt v. Atlantic City, 49 Id. 134, the act in question was again considered and sustained in this court, and this decision has been affirmed by the Court of…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Moore v. BurdettSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1898
- Seaside Realty & Improvement Co. v. Atlantic CitySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1906
3Cited by1 opinion
- Undercliff Terminal & Warehouse Co. v. Borough of EdgewaterSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1911