1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 60 N.J.
  5. 60 N.J. Super. 146 (1960)
 

SCHOELPPLE v. WOODBRIDGE TWP.

60 N.J. Super. 146 (1960)

158 A.2d 338

ERIC SCHOELPPLE, MARY SCHOELPPLE, AUGUSTINE LAVIN, HELEN LAVIN, JOHN BALLEK AND JOAN BALLEK, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF WOODBRIDGE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, AND MAR-RAY INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided February 24, 1960.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Sam Weiss argued the cause for the appellants (Messrs. Garretson, Levine & Deegan, attorneys; Mr. Joseph F. Deegan, Jr., of counsel).

Mr. Nathan Duff argued the cause for respondent Township of Woodbridge; Mr. Joseph M. Feinberg argued the cause for respondent Mar-Ray Inc. (Mr. Sanford Halberstadter on the brief).

Before Judges PRICE, GAULKIN and SULLIVAN.

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

Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment of the Superior Court, Law Division, upholding a variance granted under N.J.S.A. 40:55-39(d) to Mar-Ray Inc. to build an A. & P. supermarket in a residence zone.

The premises for which the variance was granted are known as Lots 28, 12 and 13 in Block 414 on the Woodbridge tax maps. They are described...

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