Administrative Law

Paper Summary:

This paper discusses the case of "Michael Hegarty and Joseph Hoff v. the Township of Old Bridge Ethics Board, Division of Local Government Services and Department of Community Affairs". It discusses the history of the make-up of the boards, the background of the case and the ruling which found that the Local Ethics Board had violated the petitioners' rights to due process.

From the Paper:

"Hoff argued that the proceedings against him were unconstitutional. He made this claim based on the fact that the Ethics Board was created with an ordinance that requires three of its members to be clergymen, thus not allowing for the separation of church and state as so required by the first amendment. He further stated that not enough members were present to vote on the issue in the first place. The Ethics Board countered, stating that neither the Township of Old Bridge nor any independent local authority may permit the hiring of a former member of that authority for compensation. Three quarters of the Ethics Board were present for the meeting, which the board felt to be adequate. The Ethics Board also pointed out that only the New Jersey Superior Court has jurisdiction to resolve this issue, not an ALJ or the Local Finance Board."

Sample of Sources Used:

• "Initial Decision". Rutgers University School of Law Library. <http://lawlibrary.rutgers.edu/oaldecisions/initial/cfb2317-00_1.html>

More papers on Administrative Law:

• Analytical Essay # 132931 : "Canadian Administrative Law"
• Term Paper # 145934 : "Administrative Law in the DRC"
• Term Paper # 103819 : "Administrative Law: A Manual for Employees"
• Analytical Essay # 143966 : "Canadian Administrative Law"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: