TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

State v. Inhabitants of West Hoboken

THE STATE, MARCUS FLEISCHAUER, PROSECUTOR v. THE INHABITANTS OF THE TOWNSHIP OF WEST HOBOKEN AND ERNEST PEIGNE

State v. Inhabitants of West Hoboken, 39 N.J.L. 421 (1877)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Supreme Court of New Jersey · State Highest Courts
Decided
June 15, 1877
Judges
Syckel
Citations
39 N.J.L. 421
Headnotes
Where a writ of certiorari is prosecuted in aid of an ejectment suit, the present owner should be made a party to it, otherwise he cannot be bound by the adjudication.
Summary
On certiorari. In matter of taxation.

Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.

Opinion of the Court — Syckel

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

The opinion of the court was delivered by Van Syckel, J.

The writ in this case is prosecuted to test the validity of the assessment for taxes on lots of the relator in West Hoboken, in the year 1868, and the subsequent sales of said lots for the non-payment of the taxes imposed.

The lots were sold by the township to one E. T. Bene, for non-payment of the taxes assessed against them.

Bene subsequently conveyed the lots to Ernest Peigne, and he conveyed them, before the certiorari was sued out, to Lifria Columbus.

Where a certiorari is prosecuted in aid of an ejectment *422 suit, the present owner should be made' a party to it, other-, wise he cannot be bound by the adjudication.

In this case, Columbus, who held the tax title when the-writ was sued out, has not been made a party, and therefore he cannot be concluded by any judgment which this court may render.

I think, therefore, that no opinion should be expi’essed upon the points involved in this controversy, until such proceedings are taken that Columbus may be heard.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 0

No citations to other opinions in this database were found.

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list