Case ID: njl_86/html/0702-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Pee Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

HARRY SMITH, APPELLANT, v. INHABITANTS OF THE CITY OF TRENTON, RESPONDENT.
    Submitted June 17, 1914
    Decided July 10, 1914.
    On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following per cuñam was filed:
    “The ordinance brought up for review was enacted pursuant to the powers conferred upon the city of Trenton by Pamph. L. 1910, p. 140, and by Pamph. L. 1904, p. 283.
    “The sole objection to the ordinance has been disposed of in an opinion this day filed in Delaware River Transportation Co. v. Inhabitants of the City of Trenton, 90 Atl. Rep. 731.
    “The ordinance will be affirmed, with costs.”
    For the appellant, William B. Blackman.
    
    For the respondent, Charles B. Bird.
    
   Pee Curiam.

The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by Mr. Justice Trenchard in the Supreme Court.

For affirmance — The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Garrison, Swayze, Parker, Bergen, Kalisch, Bogert, Vre-DENBURGH, WHITE, HbPPENHEIMER, WILLIAMS, JJ. 12.

For reversal — Minturn, Black, JJ. 2.