Perth Amboy evening news., 1923-11-20
ALDERMEN Get ADVICE
IN HARTMAN CASE
Continued from Page y

new trial should be properly made
within thirty days after the render
ing of a verdict. This was not done
and consequently the City has lost
it's right to set aside this judgment
by way of an application to the
Judge of the District Court, which
rendered the judgment in question.
I am advised that the City of
Perth Amboy was in a position to de-
fend this cause of action before the
Judge of the Perth Amboy District
Court with the following defenses:
I. Plaintiff was suspended by the
Mayor of the City of Perth Amboy
on March rs, 1920, charges having
been preferred against plaintiff for
conduct unbecoming an officer, in
volving moral terpitude.
2. Said plaintiff at the time of
suspension was under indictment for
a criminal offense.
3. Plaintiff never reported for
duty after his suspension nor while
under suspension.
a. No trial was had on said
charges because of an understand
ing that the plaintiff would resign,
and said resignation was offered and
accepted on June 81, 1928.
5. The resignation of the plain
tiff prevented the trial by the de-
PENDANT on the charges preferred by
the plaintiff.
(The foregoing enumerated de-
lenses are taken from the records
of the Perth Amboy District Court
and represent the specification Of
defenses filed by Leo Goldberger, as
Attorney of the City of Perth Amboy.
but which were never advanced to
the Court by reason of the fact that
the City did not appear in Court,
through it's Attorney, or otherwise,
on the day when judgment was rem
dered.)
On the other hand, these appear
to be equitable defenses, of which
only the court of chancery had jur-
isdiction. I seriously doubt, that the
judge of the Perth Amboy district
court could have taken cognizance
| of them under u rules of evidence.
However. steps should have been
taken, prior to the entry of judg-
ment to appeal to the court of chan
| Gerry for equitable relief. 1 feel quite
| confident that the court of chancery
would have restrained the Perth
Amboy district court from entering
| judgment until such time as il
would have heard the city of Perth
Amboy on the merits of its defenses,
and If found to be based upon fact,
thep to make the restraint perma-
nent.
While this was not done and al
| though the time for making an APP
peal had elapsed, and although nc
| effort was made within the statu-
tory period of thirty days within
which to make application to sci
aside the judgment, and the matter
has consequently drifted along UNI
til this time without IN action TAX.
en- for the protection oil
the city's interest, the court OF
chancery may still take cognizance
Of the situation If proper proof !:
presented. give equitable relief &c
the city. | feel confident that If the
city of Perth Amboy can produce q
preponderance of evidence, that vii
/ satisfy the court. that the resigna'
ton of the plaintiff was accepted by
the governing body of the city O
Perth Amboy, by reason of the ex-
press representation and promise o.
William Hartman, or anyone speak
ing authoritatively in his behalf, tina
if his resignation was accepted apf
the pending charges against hin
witt3rawn. that he would wave al