Case Name: RAHLE BLOOM, RELATOR, v. THOMAS J. DOWLING, INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF ORANGE, AND THE CITY OF ORANGE, RESPONDENTS
Court: New Jersey Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1927-01-18
Citations: 5 N.J. Misc. 115
Docket Number: 
Parties: RAHLE BLOOM, RELATOR, v. THOMAS J. DOWLING, INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF ORANGE, AND THE CITY OF ORANGE, RESPONDENTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Miscellaneous Reports
Volume: 5
Pages: 115–115

Head Matter:
RAHLE BLOOM, RELATOR, v. THOMAS J. DOWLING, INSPECTOR OF BUILDINGS OF THE CITY OF ORANGE, AND THE CITY OF ORANGE, RESPONDENTS.
Submitted May 14, 1926
Decided January 18, 1927.
Before Justices Kalisch, Katzenbach and Lloyd.
For the relator, Phillip J. Scholland.
For the respondents, William A. Calhoun.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This matter is before us on demurrer to the respondents' return to an alternative writ of mandamus. The relator applied to respondent, the building inspector of the city of Orange, for a permit to erect a two-story building containing a ground floor of six stores and a second floor of four apartments on a lot owned by him at the corner of Park avenue and Day street, in that city. The application was refused by the building inspector on the ground that the lot upon which the building was to he erected was in a part of the city zoned by ordinance for residences only. The present writ was then allowed.
An examination of the petition for the; writ and of the return to the writ itself evinces that the case falls squarely within the decision of the Court of Errors and Appeals in Ignaciunas v. Risley, 98 N. J. L. 712.
The facts not being in dispute, a peremptory writ will be awarded.