From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Sutkowski v. Jackson TP

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Mar 19, 1982
184 N.J. Super. 97 (App. Div. 1982)

Opinion

Argued March 8, 1982 —

Decided March 19, 1982.

Appeal from The Superior Court, Chancery Division, Ocean County, 184 N.J. Super. 198.

Before Judges BISCHOFF, KING and POLOW.

Marlene Lynch Ford argued the cause for appellant.

Joseph F. Martone argued the cause for respondents.


The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Havey in his opinion of February 11, 1981. 184 N.J. Super. 198. Our review of the extensive legislative history preceding adoption of N.J.S.A. 40A:9-12, L. 1971, c. 200, as amended by L. 1979, c. 83, and N.J.S.A. 40A:9-12.1, L. 1979, c. 302, persuades us the judge correctly concluded that the Legislature "intended to continue the general mandate that the filling of vacancies, unless specifically provided otherwise by statute, would be for the unexpired term." See 63 Am.Jur.2d, Public Officers and Employees, § 155 at 723-724. Furthermore, plaintiff's failure to complete her Civil Defense course within one year of her appointment, as mandated by statute, disqualified her from continuing in office. N.J.S.A.App. A:9-40.1.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Sutkowski v. Jackson TP

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Mar 19, 1982
184 N.J. Super. 97 (App. Div. 1982)
Case details for

Sutkowski v. Jackson TP

Case Details

Full title:EVELYN SUTKOWSKI, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Mar 19, 1982

Citations

184 N.J. Super. 97 (App. Div. 1982)
445 A.2d 409

Citing Cases

Monroe Tp. Council v. Garibaldi

That statute sought to clarify when a vacancy occurs in any appointive county or municipal office. Sutkowski…

Butler v. Amato

Since the term of an office is distinct from the tenure of an officer, `the term of office' is not affected…