LAVIN v. CITY OF CAMDEN


39 N.J. 57 (1962)

186 A.2d 693

HARRY G. LAVIN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF CAMDEN AND THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND PARKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CAMDEN, INTERVENOR-RESPONDENT. BRANDT ENTERPRISES, INC., A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF CAMDEN AND PARKING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CAMDEN, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Decided December 17, 1962.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. W. Louis Bossle argued the cause for plaintiffs-appellants.

Mr. George E. Stransky, Jr., and Mr. Joseph M. Nardi, Jr., argued the cause for defendant-respondent City of Camden.

Mr. Theodore I. Botter, First Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for the Attorney General of New Jersey, amicus curiae (Mr. Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General, attorney; Mr. Joseph A. Hoffman, on the brief).

Mr. Norman Heine argued the cause for respondent Parking Authority of the City of Camden.


The opinion of the court was delivered PER CURIAM.

These are taxpayer's actions. In the Lavin matter, plaintiff attacked an ordinance of the City of Camden guaranteeing the payment of bonds of the Parking Authority of the City of Camden. The trial court gave judgment for defendants. Lavin v. City of Camden, 71 N.J.Super. 71 (Law Div. 1961). The city then adopted an ordinance appropriating moneys and authorizing...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases