State ex rel. Roche v. Bruggemann
Supreme Court of New Jersey
On rule to show cause why an information in the nature of a quo warranto should not issue against the defendant to inquire by what authority he holds and exercises the office of director at large of the board of chosen freeholders of the county of Hudson.
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
Scudder, J.
The affidavits taken upon this rule to show cause afford strong proof that in the general election held in-the county of Hudson in November, 1889, there was fraud practiced by the use of illegal ballots, and by the votes of those who were not entitled to vote at such election. Changes also appear to have been made in the poll books by the fraudulent conduct of the officers having charge of the election and by others who participated in the frauds. These matters have been made the subject of a public investigation, under the-authority of the…
2Cited by4 opinions
- Lehlbach v. HaynesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1891
- Application of James T. MurphyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1968
- In re the Contest of the November 8, 2005 General ElectionSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2007
- Mettler v. MurphyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1968