Hall v. Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City
| Decision Date | 08 June 1928 |
| Docket Number | No. 277.,277. |
| Citation | 142 A. 344 |
| Parties | HALL v. MAYOR and ALDERMEN OF JERSEY CITY et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Rule by Edwin S. Hall for a writ of mandamus to be directed to the Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City and others. Rule discharged.
Argued January term, 1928, before TRENCHARD, KALISCH, and KATZENBACH, JJ.
John Milton, of Jersey City, for relator.
Thomas J. Brogan, of Jersey City, for respondents.
The relator obtained from this court a rule to show cause why the respondents should not issue to him a permit to erect a gasoline station upon his premises in the city of Jersey City. An application for a permit was first made, as is required by the ordinance of Jersey City, to the respondents, for the erection of the gasoline station. The respondents gave notice of, and held, a public hearing, at which hearing adjacent property owners by counsel, objected to the proposed service station on the ground that the street was one of Jersey City's main arteries; that it would be dangerous to pedestrians to have automobiles crossing the sidewalks; that schools were located in the vicinity; that traffic would be retarded, and therefore the board of commissioners refused to grant the permit applied for. Thereupon an application was made to this court for a rule to show cause why a mandamus should not issue directing the respondents to issue a permit to the relator for the purpose specified in his application. Leave was given to either party to take depositions to be used on the hearing of the rule to show cause.
It is a matter of common observance that the crossing of sidewalks by motorcars for the purpose of being served by gasoline stations, or for any other purpose, is another added danger to the pedestrian, who is entitled to the free use of the public sidewalk. We think this circumstance, alone, appearing, was sufficient by itself to warrant the refusal of the permit applied for. See Silvester v. Mayor and Common Council of Borough of Princeton (N. J. Sup.) 139 A. 517.
From the testimony taken before the Supreme Court Commissioner and used upon the rule to show cause, it appears that for the purpose of erecting the gasoline service station, and the use to which it was to be put, it was proposed to install four underground tanks having a capacity of twenty barrels each for the reception of gasoline. There was testimony that this amount of storage of gasoline would increase the fire hazard, in that immediately surrounding the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Cecil v. Toenjes
...1916C, 818;Storer v. Downey, 215 Mass. 273, 102 N. E. 321;Hyma v. Seeger et al., 233 Mich. 659, 207 N. W. 834;Hall v. Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City et al., 142 A. 344, 6 N. J. Misc. Rep. 558; Martin v. City of Danville, 148 Va. 247, 138 S. E. 629. See also City of Wichita Falls et al. v......
-
Cecil v. Toenjes
... ... city of Waterloo to ... issue the plaintiff a license ... Seeger, 233 Mich. 659 (207 N.W. 834); ... Hall v. Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City (N. J.), ... 142 A ... ...
-
City of Fort Worth v. Gulf Refining Co.
...A.) 42 F. (2d) 107; Scott et al. v. Champion Building Co. et al. (Tex. Civ. App.) 28 S.W.(2d) 178; Hall v. Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City et al. (N. J. Sup.) 142 A. 344, 6 N. J. Misc. 558; Harz v. Paxton et al., 97 Fla. 154, 120 So. 3; Interstate Oil Co. v. City of Orange (N. J. Sup.) 16......
-
Citizens Nat. Bank of Englewood v. City of Englewood
...the sidewalks to enter service stations is a proper consideration in testing the reasonableness of zoning ordinances. Hall v. Jersey City, 142 A. 344, 6 N.J. Misc. 558. Immediately adjoining to the south is the post office. Next to the south of the post office is a church. In the next block......