Case Name: PASSAIC VALLEY WATER COMMISSION, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, PROSECUTOR-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF PATERSON, CITY OF PASSAIC, CITY OF CLIFTON, TOWNSHIP OF LITTLE FALLS, TOWN OF NUTLEY, BOROUGH OF PROSPECT PARK, BOROUGH OF TOTOWA, TOWN OF BLOOMFIELD, BOROUGH OF WEST PATERSON, AND TOWN OF BELLEVILLE, RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Court of Errors and Appeals
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1934-04-12
Citations: 112 N.J.L. 498
Docket Number: 
Parties: PASSAIC VALLEY WATER COMMISSION, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, PROSECUTOR-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF PATERSON, CITY OF PASSAIC, CITY OF CLIFTON, TOWNSHIP OF LITTLE FALLS, TOWN OF NUTLEY, BOROUGH OF PROSPECT PARK, BOROUGH OF TOTOWA, TOWN OF BLOOMFIELD, BOROUGH OF WEST PATERSON, AND TOWN OF BELLEVILLE, RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Law Reports
Volume: 112
Pages: 498–498

Head Matter:
PASSAIC VALLEY WATER COMMISSION, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, PROSECUTOR-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF PATERSON, CITY OF PASSAIC, CITY OF CLIFTON, TOWNSHIP OF LITTLE FALLS, TOWN OF NUTLEY, BOROUGH OF PROSPECT PARK, BOROUGH OF TOTOWA, TOWN OF BLOOMFIELD, BOROUGH OF WEST PATERSON, AND TOWN OF BELLEVILLE, RESPONDENTS.
Submitted February 16, 1934
Decided April 12, 1934.
For the appellant, Louis V. Hinchliffe.
For the respondents, Charles F. Lynch, Thomas C. Duffy, John C. Barbour, Peter Hofstra, Gustave A.- Hunziher, Edward C. Pettit and Lawrence E. Keenan.

Opinion:
Pee Cueiam.
The judgment under review herein should be affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion delivered by the Supreme Court.
For affirmance — The Chancelloe, Chief Justice, Teenchaed, Case, Bodine, Donges, Peeskie, Van Buskiek, Kays, Hetfield, Deae, Wells, JJ. 12.
For reversal — None.