Newark evening star and Newark advertiser. [volume] (Newark, N.J.) 1909-1916, 1910-12-31
ClTY'S LAW DEPARTMENT
HANDLES MANY CASES.

ItFtlNDALo AftEAlht
The city law department has handed
"A number OF very important cases dur
ing the year and has been successful
in most of them.
Probably the most important case II
which the city of Newark has been {
party during the past year was tina
of Newark against the Board of Euqsii
cation of Taxes and the Prudential
Insurance Company. This case in
/ volved the question of taxation of sur-
plus on life insurance policies, and thu
contention of the city was sustained
in an opinion rendered by Justice Min
turn in October last. The case ha'
been removed to the Court OF Errors
and Appeals, where it is now pending
The case OF Bemberger VI. Newark
was one In which the general superin-
tendent of works attempted 10 remove
alleged encroachment Of the complain
ant on Halsey street. The complainant
obtained a rule to show cause why the
encroachment should not be interfered
with. On August Is, Vice-ChancelloI
Stevens denied the application and dis
missed the rule to show cause.
A somewhat eimilar case was thai
of Krasner against the general super
intendent of works. krasner main
tanned a newsstand owe a stairway
leading to q cellar in Market street and
obtained a rule TO show cause why Tho
superintendent OF works should not be
enjoined from removing tho news
stand. This action was commenced IN
December. 1909, but was not finished
until February of this year. On Feb
ruary s the encroachment was ordered
to be removed.
The Chestnut Hill Land Company
brought suit against the city of New
ark to recover damages for the diver
sion OF water, by the city at, the Ma
eopin intake as part OF. the supply OF
Newark from the river, to the damage
Of the plaintiff, which is a lower ripar-
ian owner. The case was OF great i'm
p~ortance. as It involved the liability OF
the city to q great number of lower
riparian owners, whose rights it has
been impossible for the city to acquire
or condemn. The case was settled upon
payment OF 500 by the city.
The case of James Hart and others
against the city of Newark was one
III WHICH, n WIFI III IblCIdAl WIS Ia
lowed 70 review a resolution Of the
Common Council Diminishing several
employees of the city. The contention
of the prosecutors was that the mode
of dismissal was an improper one. The
case was decided in favor OF the city
on the ground hat the City Hall men
affected were employees, n not off,
GERS of the city government.
There are numerous cases involving
the question of the right TO tax bank
stock now undetermined by the SUI
preme Court. These cases, If decided
in favor of the city, will largely In
crease the city's income.
The case OF Drake against Newark
the Village OF South Orange and the
Town Of Ir~vington, involves the ques-
ton of pollution of a pond belonging
to the plaintiff. This case is now pend
ing in the Supreme Court.
Another case that is now pending
Is that of Bolles against Newark. which
is an action on certiorari to review the
ordinance OF the Common Council regu-
lating loan brokers.
There are a number of cases now
pending involving the right of the city
to assess for the construction of the
joint outlet sewer.
The suit Of Runyon g. Carey agains,
the Board Of Education arose out oil
the preparation of plans for the heat.
ing and ventilating apparatus for tn,
Central Commercial and Manual Train
ing High School. The plans Of the
architect and engineer could not b,
used, because the bids received thereon
exceeded the appropriation by ovel
$500, 900, and the plans were finally re.
jected.
The architect and engineer brough'
suit against the Board of Education
and the board filed a plea of genera
issue and annexed thereto a notice o.
recoupment. claiming q return of th'
money paid by the board on coou
of the bill for services claimed TO b.
rendered in the preparation of tn
plans. The attorneys Of Runyon 8
Carey filed a demurrer to the recoup
ment. and the Supreme Court. at TIL
last term, decided that the demurre
must be o%verruled.
The suit of Gustave Schwitzer agains
the board, to set aside the awarding o
the contract for the East Side Com
lnercial and Manual Training Higl
School to Frederick Kilgus was ais
decided in favor Of the board.
The plaintiff fled thirty-three reason
for his suit. but all Of them were ne
aside. The boards action was sus
tanned throughout. Charles NJ. Myers
assistant city attorney. represented tn
board in both cases.