Argued November 19, 1914—
Decided March 1, 1915.
On appeal from the Supreme Court, in which court the following per curiam was filed:
“Per curiam—The opinions just filed in Paterson v. Jersey City, 84 N. J. L. 454, and Paterson v. Kearny, 84 Id. 456, are applicable in the present case. It is only necessary to add that the city’s power to condemn water and water rights seems to be clear under the act of 1895.” Comp. Stat., 2198, pl. 38.
For the appellant, Edward F. Merrey, William B. Gourley and John W. Griggs.
For the respondent, Gilbert Collins and Daniel J. Murray.
The judgment under review will be affirmed for the reasons given by us in our opinions delivered at the present term in the cases of The Mayor and Aldermen of Paterson v. The Mayor and Aldermen of Jersey City, ante p. 163, and The Mayor and Aldermen of Paterson v. Town of Kearny, post p. 327.
For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chibe Justice, Garrison, Trenchard, Parker, Bergen, Black, Bogert, VREDENBURGH, WHITE, HEPPENHEIMER, WILLIAMS, JJ. 12.
For reversal—None.
87 N.J.L. 323
Nothing yet... Still searching!
Nothing yet... Still searching!