State v. Celmer

Decision Date12 July 1976
Citation362 A.2d 1330,143 N.J.Super. 371
PartiesSTATE of New Jersey, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Louis J. CELMER, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.
CourtNew Jersey County Court

William B. Gallagher, Asbury Park, for defendant-appellant (Klitzman, Klitzman & Gallagher, Asbury Park, attorneys).

Thomas Primavera, Freehold, for plaintiff-respondent (James M. Coleman, Jr., Prosecutor of Monmouth County, attorney).

SHEBELL, J.C.C.

On March 24, 1976 defendant was charged in three summonses, returnable before the Ocean Grove Municipal Court, with operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol (N.J.S.A. 39:4-50(a); speeding (N.J.S.A. 39:4-98) and disregard of a traffic signal (N.J.S.A. 39:4-81). On May 3, 1976, the municipal court judge found defendant guilty of all three offenses. Notice of appeal was filed with this court on May 11, 1976. Report of the convictions was filed with the Monmouth County Clerk on May 25, 1976 bearing the caption 'Municipal Court of the Town of Ocean Grove, County of Monmouth, State of New Jersey.'

On June 11, 1976, at the trial De novo on the record below, defendant for the first time raised the issue of lack of jurisdiction of the municipal court. Defendant argues that N.J.S.A. 40:97-1 Et seq., enacted to grant powers to Camp Meeting Associations to act with the same powers as a municipality, including the power to establish a municipal court, is unconstitutional.

Decision on the constitutional arguments was reserved. The court made findings as to the sufficiency of the proofs with respect to the three charges and declared that the guilt of defendant had been proved beyond a reasonable doubt as to driving while under the influence of alcohol but that the other two charges had not been proven. Defendant was ordered to comply with R. 4:28-4, giving notice to the Attorney General of the State of New Jersey and also to the Ocean Grove Municipal Court, the attorneys for Ocean Grove and to the Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association of the United Methodist Church and its Police Chief. No one other than the Prosecutor of Monmouth County and the attorney for defendant has appeared.

R. 7:4-2(e) carries over to the municipal court practice the provisions of R. 3:10-3 and 3:10-4. The State argues that by not raising the defense of lack of jurisdiction or the unconstitutionality of the statute at an earlier time, it is waived. There is no merit to this position. R. 3:10-3 specifically permits the raising of such a defense on appeal. The prohibition of the aforementioned rules and R. 3(10-2 excepts from its mandate as to motions which must be raised before trial that of lack of jurisdiction. Even with respect to those defenses which must be raised before trial, the court is given authority for good cause shown to grant relief from the waiver of the defense for failure to raise it before trial.

L.1870, c. 157 incorporated Ocean Grove, establishing the original incorporators and their successors as a body corporate and politic under the name of 'The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association of the Methodist Episcopal Church.' The name was later changed to 'The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association of the United Methodist Church.' L.1968, c. 231. The purpose stated in L.1870, c. 157, § 1 is for 'providing and maintaining for the members and friends of the Methodist Episcopal Church a proper, convenient and desirable permanent camp meeting ground and christian seaside resort.' The charter and the by-laws of the Association require that the trustees be and remain members of the United Methodist Church in good and regular standing. Association By-Laws, Arts I, II and III.

The board of trustees manage and govern the Association under the charter and by-laws. The by-laws, which are subject to revision only by the trustees, provide that the board is self-perpetuating in that they themselves elect their replacements and successors. All officers are elected from the trustees. There is no requirement that the trustees reside in Ocean Grove at any time. The land which forms the area known as Ocean Grove is owned by the Camp Meeting Association and is subdivided into lots which may be leased 'for ninety-nine years, or less, subject to renewal if none of the conditions have been violated, to parties who may be vouched for as of good moral character and in sympathy with the objects of this Association, when approved by the President or his designated representative in writing, subject to such rules and regulations as may be adopted by the Association or the Executive Committee from time to time.' By-Laws, Art. XI.

This Camp Meeting Association and any other which can qualify under N.J.S.A. 40:97-1 as being 'incorporated under the laws of this state for the purpose of providing any religious body or society with a permanent camp meeting ground or place of religious service', is granted general powers which have been held to establish Camp Meeting Associations as a class of municipalities. Percello v. Ocean Grove, 100 N.J.L. 407, 408, 126 A. 533 (E. & A.1924) N.J.S.A. 40:97-1 Et seq. ratifies the powers of the trustees of such associations to adopt by-law and extends their powers to the passage of ordinances and resolutions. N.J.S.A. 40:97-5. The trustees may set 'penalties for violations' of such rules, regulations, by-laws, ordinances and resolutions, which shall have 'the force and effect of laws' and which 'shall be enforceable in the same manner and in the same courts as municipal ordinances.' N.J.S.A. 40:97-6 to 8.

Express authority is given to the trustees under N.J.S.A. 40:97-4 to establish by ordinance a municipal court with the same functions, powers and duties that may be given to municipalities by law. The Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Association, by ordinance adopted April 17, 1964, established the municipal court as it now exists. The ordinance provides that the magistrate of the court, to be known as the 'Municipal Court of Ocean Grove,' shall be appointed by the board of trustees for a term of three years and until his successor is appointed and qualified. The ordinance provides for the hours when the court shall sit and also the place where court will be held.

Defendant contends that the statutes granting to Camp Meeting Associations powers to govern as a municipality, and particularly granting them powers of law enforcement and authority to establish a court, are unconstitutional as violating the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as it commands that there should be 'no law respecting an establishment of religion.'

This objection must be viewed at this time with due regard to the development of the tests outlined by the United States Supreme Court in recent years. It will no longer suffice to merely reflect on the long standing support the enactments have enjoyed when reviewed in the distant past...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Schaad v. Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Ass'n of United Methodist Church
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • February 10, 1977
    ...that enforcement of the ordinance would have on Schaad. The record shows that his business would be destroyed.5 State v. Celmer, 143 N.J.Super. 371, 362 A.2d 1330 (Cty.Ct.1976). We here take no position on the strict holding in Celmer that the legislative vesting of power to establish a mun......
  • State v. Celmer
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • June 21, 1979
    ...at that time. The County Court's decision as to defendant's constitutional claim was rendered on July 12, 1976. State v. Celmer, 143 N.J.Super. 371, 362 A.2d 1330 (Cty.Ct.1976). It concluded that N.J.S.A. 40:97-1 Et seq. did indeed violate the dictates of the First Amendment, and that there......
  • State v. Brennan
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • December 21, 1988
    ...or arrest of the person so charged. See State v. Wallace, 201 N.J.Super. 608, 493 A.2d 645 (Law Div.1985) and State v. Celmer, 143 N.J.Super. 371, 377, 362 A.2d 1330 (Cty.Ct.1976), rev'd 157 N.J.Super. 242, 384 A.2d 894 (App.Div.1978), rev'd 80 N.J. 405, 419, 404 A.2d 1, cert. den. 444 U.S.......
  • State v. Wallace
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • March 21, 1985
    ...vehicle violation bars the prosecution of the action is a question addressed briefly by the County Court in State v. Celmer, 143 N.J.Super. 371, 362 A.2d 1330 (Cty.Ct.1976), rev'd 157 N.J.Super. 242, 384 A.2d 894 (App.Div.1978), rev'd 80 N.J. 405, 404 A.2d 1 (1979). In an opinion by Judge S......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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