Case Name: MARY J. WASSEL, RELATOR, v. HENRY J. GAUTCHEY, BUILDING INSPECTOR, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1926-05-18
Citations: 4 N.J. Misc. 514
Docket Number: 
Parties: MARY J. WASSEL, RELATOR, v. HENRY J. GAUTCHEY, BUILDING INSPECTOR, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 514–514

Head Matter:
MARY J. WASSEL, RELATOR, v. HENRY J. GAUTCHEY, BUILDING INSPECTOR, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS.
Submitted May term, 1926
Decided May 18, 1926.
Before Justices Pabkeb, Black and Campbell.
Eor the relator, Viviano & Kehoe.
Por the respondents, William W. Evans.

Opinion:
Pee Cubiam.
This case is before the court on a rule to show cause why a writ of mandamus should not issue to the building inspector in a zoning case, an agreed state of facts is submitted to the court, in writing, duly signed by the respective attorneys and filed. Upon reading and answering the facts we. are satisfied the cases controlled by the case of State v. Nutley, 99 N. J. L. 389; affirmed, 98 Id., 712, as being directly in point. A rule may be entered, therefore, directing a peremptory writ of mandamus to issue to the building inspector of the borough of Hawthorne, Passaic county.