Hart v. Borough of Hawthorne
| Decision Date | 16 September 1938 |
| Docket Number | No. 44.,44. |
| Citation | 121 N.J.L. 135,1 A.2d 416 |
| Parties | HART v. BOROUGH OF HAWTHORNE. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Appeal from Supreme Court.
Action by Frances Hart against the Borough of Hawthorne, a municipal corporation of New Jersey, to recover salary as Recorder of Borough of Hawthorne, for an interval during which the plaintiff was excluded from office by a de facto officer who was paid for services rendered. A judgment for the defendant was affirmed by the Supreme Court, 120 N.J.L. 27, 197 A. 891, and the plaintiff appeals.
Affirmed.
Meyer Lobsenz, of Paterson, for appellant.
Alexander M. MacLeod, of Paterson (I. Arthur Weiss, of Paterson, of counsel), for appellee.
The opinion of the Supreme Court, reported in 120 N.J.L. 27, 197 A. 891, sufficiently advises as to the facts of this case. After study of the argument and citations suggested by counsel we conclude that the action of the Supreme Court in affirming the trial court was correct and that its judgment should be affirmed. We wish only to point out that the question involved appears to be controlled by P.L.1925, Chapter 239, now being R.S. 40:11-7, wherein it is declared: "Any person who has or shall have held, de facto, any office or position in the public service of any county or municipality, and who has or shall have performed the duties thereof, shall be entitled to the emoluments and compensation appropriate to such office or position for the time in fact so held and may recover therefor in any court of competent jurisdiction, notwithstanding any refusal or failure of any other person or officer."
The judgment of the Supreme Court is affirmed.
For affirmance: The CHANCELLOR, Justices CASE, BODINE, DONGES, HEHER, PERSKIE, and PORTER, and Judges HETFIELD, DEAR, WELLS, WOLFSKEIL, RAFFERTY, and WALKER—13.
For reversal: None.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
De Marco v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of Bergen County, A--66
...126 N.J.L. 563, 19 A.2d 812 (E. & A.1941); Hart v. Borough of Hawthorne, 120 N.J.L. 27, 197 A. 891 (Sup.Ct.1938), affirmed 121 N.J.L. 135, 1 A.2d 416 (E. & A.1938). In the leading case of Mayor, etc., of City of Hoboken v. Gear, supra, a policeman was appointed for two years but actually se......
-
Winne v. Bergen County
...principle are to be strictly construed (Hart v. Borough of Hawthorne, 120 N.J.L. 27, 30, 197 A. 891 (Sup.Ct.1938), affirmed 121 N.J.L. 135, 1 A.2d 416 (E. & A.1938); Strohmeyer v. Borough of Little Ferry, 136 N.J.L. 485, 56 A.2d 885, (E. & A.1948)), and that none of the legislative enactmen......
-
Pollak v. Bor. Of Wallington.
...v. Board of Education, Sup., 1934, 118 N.J.L. 311, 192 A. 591; Hart v. Borough of Hawthorne, 120 N.J.L. 27, 197 A. 891, affirmed, 121 N.J.L. 135, 1 A.2d 416. To state the case most favorably for the plaintiff's position it would be this: That he was duly appointed as police officer by resol......
-
Pollak v. Borough of Wallington
...Board of Education (Supreme Court, 1934), 118 N.J.L. 311; 192 A. 591; Hart v. Borough of Hawthorne, 120 N.J.L. 27; 197 A. 891; affirmed, 121 N.J.L. 135; A.2d 416. To state the case most favorably for the plaintiff's position it would be this: That he was duly appointed as police officer by ......