Haywood v. Ryan

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
Writing for the CourtBERGEN, J.
Citation88 A. 820,85 N.J.L. 116
Decision Date10 November 1913
PartiesHAYWOOD v. RYAN et al.
88 A. 820
85 N.J.L. 116

HAYWOOD
v.
RYAN et al.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Nov. 10, 1913.


(Syllabus by the Court.)
88 A. 821

Certiorari to Recorder's Court of Paterson.

Certiorari by William D. Haywood against Charles H. Ryan and another from a conviction in the Recorder's Court of the City of Paterson of being a disorderly person. Conviction set aside.

Argued June term, 1913, before SWAYZE, BERGEN, and VOORHEES, JJ.

Hunziker & Randall and Henry Marelli, all of Paterson, for prosecutor.

Randal B. Lewis and Edward P Merrey, both of Pater son, for defendants.

BERGEN, J. The prosecutor in this proceeding was convicted in the recorder's court of the city of Paterson. The conviction recites that the court found the defendant guilty of being a disorderly person within the meaning and intent of section 3 of an act entitled "An act concerning disorderly persons approved June 14th, 1898" (C. S. 1927), "in that the said defendant on the day and year last aforesaid, to wit, at the city of Paterson, in the county of Passaic aforesaid, did obstruct and interfere with persons, to wit, persons unknown, upon Haledon avenue, a public street in the said city of Paterson, who were lawfully in and upon said street; I do therefore adjudge said defendant to be a disorderly person within the intent and meaning of section 3 of the aforesaid act." The judgment of the court was that defendant be committed to the common jail of the county of Passaic for the period of six months. It thus appears that the conviction was based upon the finding that the defendant obstructed and interfered with persons upon a public street of the city of Paterson.

Section 3 of the act above referred to declares that persons who shall loiter or assemble on the streets or public places of any city, being under the influence of intoxicating liquor, or who, not being under such influence, shall indulge in or utter loud or indecent language, or shall address or make audible offensive remarks or comment upon any person passing along such streets or public places, or shall obstruct or interfere with any person or persons lawfully being upon such streets or public places, shall be deemed and adjudged to be a disorderly person. This conviction by its terms is restricted to the latter paragraph of the section, and therefore to sustain this conviction there must be some evidence that this defendant did obstruct or interfere with persons lawfully upon a public street.

A very careful...

To continue reading

Request your trial
4 practice notes
  • State v. Lashinsky
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 23, 1979
    ...direct contact which physically obstructs or restrains the lawful activities of another individual, see, E. g., Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 118-119, 88 A. 820 (Sup.Ct.1913); State v. Guillotte, 10 N.J.Super. 502, 503, 77 A.2d 65 (Cty.Ct.1950), would constitute a ready example of the sta......
  • State v. Manning
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • January 28, 1977
    ...not with the court's analysis (at 398--399, 297 A.2d at 217) of the word 'interfere' as used in the statute. Page 593 In Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 88 A. 820 (Sup.Ct.1913), the court held that there was no testimony whatever that defendant obstructed or interfered with other persons in......
  • Dolan Dining Co., Inc. v. Cooks' & Assistants' Union, Local No. 399, A. F. Of L.
    • United States
    • New Jersey County Court
    • November 18, 1938
    ...a nuisance, or result in the creation of a nuisance. Gevas v. Greek Restaurant Workers Club, 99 N.J.Eq. 770, 134 A. 309. Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 88 A. 820, is not contra. The only issue before the court in that case was the application of the language of a statute to the proven fact......
  • Wilkinson, Gaddis & Co. v. Borough of Neptune City
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • November 10, 1913
    ...A. 81985 N.J.L. 21 WILKINSON, GADDIS & CO. v. BOROUGH OF NEPTUNE CITY. Supreme Court of New Jersey. Nov. 10, 1913. 88 A. 820 Certiorari to Review a Conviction before a Justice of the Certiorari by Wilkinson, Gaddis & Company to review a conviction before a Justice of the Peace for violation......
4 cases
  • State v. Lashinsky
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • July 23, 1979
    ...direct contact which physically obstructs or restrains the lawful activities of another individual, see, E. g., Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 118-119, 88 A. 820 (Sup.Ct.1913); State v. Guillotte, 10 N.J.Super. 502, 503, 77 A.2d 65 (Cty.Ct.1950), would constitute a ready example of the sta......
  • State v. Manning
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • January 28, 1977
    ...not with the court's analysis (at 398--399, 297 A.2d at 217) of the word 'interfere' as used in the statute. Page 593 In Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 88 A. 820 (Sup.Ct.1913), the court held that there was no testimony whatever that defendant obstructed or interfered with other persons in......
  • Dolan Dining Co., Inc. v. Cooks' & Assistants' Union, Local No. 399, A. F. Of L.
    • United States
    • New Jersey County Court
    • November 18, 1938
    ...a nuisance, or result in the creation of a nuisance. Gevas v. Greek Restaurant Workers Club, 99 N.J.Eq. 770, 134 A. 309. Haywood v. Ryan, 85 N.J.L. 116, 88 A. 820, is not contra. The only issue before the court in that case was the application of the language of a statute to the proven fact......
  • Wilkinson, Gaddis & Co. v. Borough of Neptune City
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • November 10, 1913
    ...A. 81985 N.J.L. 21 WILKINSON, GADDIS & CO. v. BOROUGH OF NEPTUNE CITY. Supreme Court of New Jersey. Nov. 10, 1913. 88 A. 820 Certiorari to Review a Conviction before a Justice of the Certiorari by Wilkinson, Gaddis & Company to review a conviction before a Justice of the Peace for violation......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT