City of Atl. City v. Turner
| Decision Date | 12 March 1902 |
| Citation | 67 N.J.L. 520,51 A. 691 |
| Parties | CITY OF ATLANTIC CITY v. TURNER. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
(Syllabus by the Court.)
William H. Turner was convicted of violating a city ordinance, and brings certiorari. Reversed.
Argued November term, 1901, before DIXON and HENDRICKSON, JJ.
William I. Garrison, for plaintiff.
Godfrey & Godfrey, for defendant.
The plaintiff in certiorari was convicted before the recorder of Atlantic City of violating section 6 of an ordinance of said city entitled "An ordinance to regulate the business of driving omnibuses, automobiles or locomobiles, and fixing the fares to be charged," approved April 12, 1901. The particular offense charged in the complaint, as recited in the conviction, is "that on or about the 3d day of June, A. D. 1901, at Atlantic City aforesaid, William Turner, being then and there the driver of a certain omnibus, neglected and refused to wear in a prominent position on his clothing any number which was the same as the license number assigned and issued by the mercantile appraiser for the said conveyance which he was driving, all of which is contrary to the provisions of section 6," etc., of the ordinance above described. After hearing the evidence the recorder found the defendant below guilty of the offense charged, and adjudged that he pay the fine of $20 prescribed by the ordinance. A reversal of the conviction is sought on the ground, among others, that the record fails to set forth all the facts necessary to constitute a legal conviction.
The provisions of section 6 of the ordinance require that all persons owning omnibuses, etc., "or vehicles of whatever character that may be required to be licensed, shall by the mercantile appraiser be assigned a number for each vehicle so licensed; * * * that no person under the age of sixteen years shall be licensed to drive any omnibus, hack, carriage or other public conveyance, and that the driver of every omnibus, hack, carriage or other public conveyance shall wear, in a prominent position on his clothing, a number which shall be the same as the number issued for the conveyance he drives." The conviction shows that the only evidence produced was the ordinance above described and the testimony of a police officer. The latter testified that he saw the defendant on Tennessee avenue, in Atlantic City, coming out, driving his bus, and that he was without his badge; that witness meant by "badge" the license number issued by the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Miller, 267
...of an ordinance prohibiting such act on a public street or highway. The court quoted with approval from Atlantic City v. Turner, 67 N.J.L. 520, 51 A. 691 (Sup.Ct.1902), as 'The offense is a penal one and must therefore be strictly proved. In summary proceedings to recover a penalty, the pro......
-
Henn v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
... ... Hampton v. Insurance Co., 65 N. J. Law, 265, 47 Atl. 433, 52 L. R. A. 344 ... The main contention for ... ...
-
Smith v. City Of Asbury Park
...or the south circle of Railroad Square’. There was no evidence to support such a finding. In the case of Atlantic City v. Turner, Sup.Ct.1902, 67 N.J.L. 520, 51 A. 691, 692, wherein defendant was convicted of violation of local ordinance regulating business of driving omnibusses, etc., defe......
-
Miller v. Borough of Belmar
...willfully or recklessly, in disregard of his own life, gone beyond the safety limits as established by the borough. Atlantic City v. Turner, 67 N. J. Law, 520, 51 A. 691. According to the record, it does not appear that there was any testimony tending to prove that the borough had establish......