State ex rel. Mayor of Rutherford v. Hudson River Traction Co.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On application for mandamus.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Pitney, J.
This is a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not be issued against the Hudson. River Traction Company requiring it to proceed forthwith to macadamize a section of Park avenue, in the borough of Rutherford, extending from the southerly side of Ridge road to the southerly side of Newell avenue, with six-inch macadam pavement, to be laid from gutter to gutter, as provided in section 9 of an ordinance of the borough, approved March 5th, 1895, whereby the right to construct, maintain and operate a street railway in certain streets within the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- State v. Mayor of Jersey CitySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1894
- State ex rel. City of Bridgeton v. Bridgeton & Millville Traction Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1899
- Drischman v. McManeminSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1902
- Hope v. Linden Park Blood Horse Ass'nSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1896
- Iowa Life Insurance v. Eastern Mutual Life InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1900
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by17 opinions
- State ex rel. City of Milwaukee v. Milwaukee Electric Railway & Light Co.Wisconsin Supreme Court · 1911
- State ex rel. Porter v. HudsonSupreme Court of Missouri · 1910
- Gas & Electric Securities Co. v. Manhattan & Queens Traction Corp.Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1920
- Humthlett v. ReevesSupreme Court of Georgia · 1955
- City of Hartford v. Connecticut Co.Supreme Court of Connecticut · 1928
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.