Opinion ID: 2333215
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: s. 40:50-1.

Text: The plaintiffs further contend that the proposed lease to Glaser is void for lack of advertisement under R.S. 40:50-1, which provides that no municipality shall enter into any contract for the doing of any work, or for the furnishing of any materials, and so forth, where the sum to be expended exceeds the sum of one thousand dollars, unless the governing body shall first publicly advertise for bids therefor, and shall award the contract to the lowest responsible bidder. This issue was not decided by the trial court. At the trial level this question was subject to consideration and disposition. However, in view of the disposition herein made of the principal issue relative to the Whirl-O-Ball case, supra, this secondary issue is rendered moot and is not essential to our determination or the ultimate disposition of this case. It is deemed advisable to reserve this question for subsequent disposition in a matter requiring consideration thereof.