86 N.J.L. 592 | N.J. | 1914
The opinion of the court was delivered by
The Supreme Court held that it would not in settling the question of fair value oppose its judgment to that of an administrative hoard entrusted hv law with the duty of fixing the fair value or market value of land for the purpose of assessing the same for taxes, where there was testimony be
In view of the care taken by the legislature to secure a hearing to the railroad companies, we need not deal with the
It was suggested iu the colloquy during the effort to take testimony that the practice under the Railroad Tax act from the very beginning had been for members of the board to refuse to give the information here sought. The authority cited is advice given by counsel for the state to a member of the board on the hearing of the original case. Central Railroad Co. v. State Board of Assessors, 48 N. J. L. 1. Wo are not advised whether the inquiry in that case was directed to the method by which the board reached its result or to the knowledge of the individual members. If to the former, the authority is not in point; if to the latter, we can only say that advice of counsel for a litigant to a witness can hardly he treated as authority by a court; however eminent the counsel may be as a lawyer, the attitude and duty of an advocate are very different, and rigidly different, from the attitude and duty of a court.
The judgment must be reversed, and the record remitted to the Supreme Court for further proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion.
For affirmance — Black, J. 1.
For reversal — -The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Sway-ze, Parker, Bergen, Bogert, Vredenluugh, Williams, J J. 8.