DeCARLO v. CLIFFSIDE PARK, 90 N.J. Super. 126 (1966)

216 A.2d 408

DOMINICK DeCARLO AND VISIDOR CORP., A CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. BOROUGH OF CLIFFSIDE PARK, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.Argued January 11, 1966 —
Decided January 17, 1966.

Appeal from The Superior Court, Law Division.

Page 127

Before Judges GOLDMANN, FOLEY and COLLESTER.

Mr. Joseph N. Marotta, Jr. argued the cause for appellants.

Mr. Paul L. Basile argued the cause for respondent (Messrs. Basile Delchop, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The opinion of the Law Division in this case is reported at 86 N.J. Super. 169 (1965). The borough concedes that its installation of the directional sign in question did not comply with N.J.S.A. 39:4-197(1)(c) or N.J.S.A. 39:4-8. It was therefore guilty of active wrongdoing, for which it is answerable for such damages as may have been proximately caused to the corporate plaintiff in its tavern and restaurant business. The judgment is reversed and the case remanded to the Law Division to determine the issue of damages.

Page 128