The limits of municipal power and authority were tested in the Supreme Court this term. From a municipality’s ability to preserve open space and trees to their ability to control trash collection and rats (albeit inflatable ones), the Supreme Court analyzed the source of municipal power to address a variety of topics.
In addition, the Court decided two local public contract law cases, one of which involved the first Supreme Court foray into the numerous “Pay to Play” legislative enactments over the last few years. The Court decided two Open Public Records Act (“OPRA”) cases. In the land use field, in addition to dealing with open space and tree preservation, the Court avoided addressing the constitutionality of the Highlands Act, but did address the level of proofs needed for a municipality to enact an ordinance that is inconsistent with its master plan.
Municipal Power and Authority Tested
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
