State v. Perretti, s. A--302

Decision Date02 August 1950
Docket NumberA--308,Nos. A--302,A--313,s. A--302
Citation75 A.2d 151,9 N.J.Super. 97
PartiesSTATE et al. v. PERRETTI (three cases).
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division

Samuel S. Black, Paterson, argued the cause for appellants.

Joseph A. Murphy, Assistant Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Theodore D. Parsons, Attorney General).

Before Judges McGEEHAN, COLIE and EASTWOOD.

The opinion of the court was delivered by

COLIE, J.A.D.

Appellants were arrested and tried before a magistrate on identical complaints charging that on November 2, 1949 each unlawfully procured a resident hunting license contrary to R.S. 23:3--21, N.J.S.A. which provides that 'A person not entitled hereunder to a residents' license who procures the same shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and pay a fine of not less than one hundred dollars and costs of prosecution, and whether or not he has been criminally prosecuted for the violation, shall be liable to a penalty of one hundred dollars.' Before the magistrate, the trials resulted in judgments of dismissal. The State of New Jersey took appeals to the County Court where the matters were tried Do novo, the appellants were found guilty and each sentenced to pay a fine of $100 and costs.

R.S. 23:3--4, N.J.S.A., provides for residents' and nonresidents' licenses and sets the qualifications for the former that one be a citizen of the United States above fourteen years of age, who is an 'actual and bona fide' resident of the State at the time of application for the license and who has been an actual and bona fide resident of the State for at least one year immediately prior thereto. The vital question is whether the appellants were 'actual and bona fide residents' of New Jersey.

The State proved that Joseph John Perretti, Sr., and Arthur Perretti were registered voters in New York State and gave their address as 1720 West Third Street, Brooklyn; that all three held chauffeurs' licenses issued in New York and upon which the same address appeared. In addition there was the testimony of Warden Williams that in his opinion the house occupied by the Perrettis was 'a summer bungalow uninhabitable in winter.' This conclusion was arrived at after an inspection of the living-room while the witness was standing in the doorway and without any knowledge beyond what he saw from the single observation. On behalf of the defendants there was undisputed testimony that the property had been owned by Katherine Perretti for three or four years, that it contained all their furniture, that it consisted of a sun-porch, living room, kitchen, bath and two bedrooms, and that it had a hot-air furnace in the cellar. A nearby neighbor testified that she first met the Perrettis in July 1948 and saw them living in the house each month thereafter until November 1949 when they went to Brooklyn because of the illness of Mrs. Perretti's mother....

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 cases
  • State v. Taylor
    • United States
    • New Jersey District Court
    • 9 Noviembre 1972
    ...vac. 14 N.J. 538, 103 A.2d 376 (1958); State v. Morrison, 25 N.J.Super. 534, 96 A.2d 723 (App.Div.1953); State v. Perretti, 9 N.J.Super. 97, 75 A.2d 151 (App.Div.1950); State v. Carr, 118 N.J.L. 233, 192 A. 36 (E. & A. 1937) but takes note of the equally well-established rule of law that no......
  • Trecartin v. Mahony-Troast Const. Co., MAHONY-TROAST
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court — Appellate Division
    • 6 Marzo 1952
    ...233, 192 A. 36 (E. & A. 1937); Smith v. City of Asbury Park, 3 N.J.Super. 161, 65 A.2d 755 (App.Div. 1949); State v. Perretti, 9 N.J.Super. 97, 75 A.2d 151 (App.Div. 1950). Defendant neither reserved control of the equipment to be used by Terry in the doing of the erection work, nor of the ......
  • Fortugno Realty Co. v. Schiavone-Bonomo Corp., SCHIAVONE-BONOMO
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 4 Marzo 1963
    ...construed (State v. Baker, 3 N.J.Misc. 324, 129 A. 466 (C.P.1925), affirmed ibid. 532, 128 A. 888 (Sup.Ct.1925); State v. Perretti, 9 N.J.Super. 97, 75 A.2d 151 (App.Div.1950). The court, in Gratale, continues, 26 N.J.Super. at p. 584, 98 A.2d at p. 'The evil or mischief intended to be supp......
  • State v. Benny
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 19 Diciembre 1955
    ...or authority for saying that 'domicile' is the intended meaning. For their own purposes, they chose to rely upon State v. Perretti, 9 N.J.Super. 97, 75 A.2d 151 (App.Div.1950), a fish and game controversy, as being the more logical and better construction of the words 'resident' and 'reside......
  • 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