Case ID: njl_67/html/0582-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Garretson, J.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

ASBURY PARK, DEFENDANT IN ERROR, v. THOMAS R. HAWXHURST, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR.
    Submitted March 25, 1902
    Decided June 16, 1902.
    1. The action of ejectment' by the municipal authority is the appropriate remedy against a person unlawfully encroaching upon a public highway under its control.
    2. A right in the nature of an easement, if it exists in the defendant, does not constitute a defence to an action of ejectment.
    On error to the Supreme Court.
    
      For the plaintiff in error, Wesley B. Stout.
    
    For the defendant in error, John F. Hawkins.
    
   The opinion of the court was delivered by

Garretson, J.

This case is legally indistinguishable from that of Ocean Grove v. Benthall, decided in this court, and reported in 34 Vroom 312.

The judgment is affirmed.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Ci-iiee Justice, Van Syckel, Dixon, Garrison, Collins, Garretson, Hendrickson, Pitney, Krueger, Adams, Vredenburgi-i, Voorhees, Vroom. 14.

For reversal — None.