Case Name: CONRAD C. HOFFMEIR, RELATOR, v. BOARD OF HEALTH OF CITY OF UNION CITY, RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1926-10-07
Citations: 4 N.J. Misc. 839
Docket Number: 
Parties: CONRAD C. HOFFMEIR, RELATOR, v. BOARD OF HEALTH OF CITY OF UNION CITY, RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 4
Pages: 839–839

Head Matter:
CONRAD C. HOFFMEIR, RELATOR, v. BOARD OF HEALTH OF CITY OF UNION CITY, RESPONDENT.
Submitted May term, 1926
Decided October 7, 1926.
Before Justices Parker, Black and Campbell.
Por the relator, Robert Carey and Harry Lane.
For the respondent, J. Hmil Walscheid.

Opinion:
Per Cuilam.
This case comes before the court on a rule to show cause granted by Mr. Justice Minturn, why a writ of mandamus should not issue directed to the respondent, requiring' it to recognize the relator as a plumber and heating inspector of the city of Union City, and to permit him to perform the duties of such office and directing the payment of his salary as such.
It is too plain for argument, that in these proceedings the relator is making an attempt to try the title to an office. This cannot be done in a mandamus proceeding. Nor will the writ be granted, where the facts are in dispute or the law is not settled, as in this case. The rule to show cause is discharged, with costs.