1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 36 N.J.
  5. 36 N.J. Super. 420 (1955)
 

STATE v. ACCERA

36 N.J. Super. 420 (1955)

116 A.2d 203

STATE OF NEW JERSEY, BY ITS POLITICAL SUBDIVISION, BOROUGH OF EATONTOWN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. FERDINAND ACCERA AND EMMA ACCERA, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided July 29, 1955.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Lawrence A. Carton, Jr., argued the cause for plaintiff-appellant (Messrs. Roberts, Pillsbury & Carton, attorneys).

Mr. William R. Blair, Jr., argued the cause for defendants-respondents (Messrs. Parsons, Labrecque, Canzona & Combs, attorneys).

Before Judges CLAPP, PROCTOR and HANEMAN.

The opinion of the court was delivered by CLAPP, S.J.A.D.

The question brought up by this appeal is whether the following section of Eatontown's zoning ordinance violates R.S. 40:55-48:

"No building or premises which cease to be actively engaged in non-conforming use for a period of one (1) year shall be allowed to resume such non-conforming use, but must be altered to conform with the restrictions of the zone in which it is."

As will appear...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases