Case Name: ERNEST M. HANDY, RELATOR, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE AND JOHN O. SCOTT, BUILDING INSPECTOR, DEFENDANTS
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1924-09-24
Citations: 2 N.J. Misc. 884
Docket Number: 
Parties: ERNEST M. HANDY, RELATOR, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE AND JOHN O. SCOTT, BUILDING INSPECTOR, DEFENDANTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 2
Pages: 884–884

Head Matter:
ERNEST M. HANDY, RELATOR, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE AND JOHN O. SCOTT, BUILDING INSPECTOR, DEFENDANTS.
Argued May term, 1924
Decided September 24, 1924.
Ordinances — Zoning—Writ Allowed Following Nutley Case.
On rule awarding an alternative writ of mandamus.
Before Justices Trenci-iard, Minturn and Lloyd.
Eor the relator, Howe & Davis.
Eor the defendants, Walter C. Ellis.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The case came before us upon an agreed state of facts. An alternative writ of mandamus was allowed and the city made a return thereto. The facts in substantial particulars are not unlike these presented in case number 70 of this term, State, ex rel. The Jersey Land Co. v. John Scott, Building Inspector of East Orange, in which we allowed a peremptory mandamus. We are of the opinion that for the reasons advanced in that case, based upon the recent determination of the Court of Errors and Appeals, in State v. Risley, 2 N. J. Adv. Rep. 852, as well as upon the conclusions reached in Handy v. South Orange, 118 Atl. Rep. 838; Vernon v. Westfield, 1 N. J. Adv. Rep. 1031, and Ignaciunas v. Nutley, 2 Id. 852, that a peremptory writ of mandamus go in this case.
Such will be the rule.