1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 82 N.J.
  5. 82 N.J. Super. 519 (1964)
 

J.H. BECKER, INC. v. MARLBORO TP.

82 N.J. Super. 519 (1964)

198 A.2d 463

J.H. BECKER, INC., A CORPORATION DULY ORGANIZED AND EXISTING UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. TOWNSHIP OF MARLBORO, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, GEORGE WENDEL, ASSESSOR, UNITED APPRAISAL CO., A CORPORATION, AND MONMOUTH COUNTY BOARD OF TAXATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. JOHN A. GAHLER, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF HOLMDEL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION; JOHN MOUNT, ASSESSOR OF THE TOWNSHIP OF HOLMDEL; MUNICIPAL REVALUATIONS, INC., A BODY CORPORATE; AND MONMOUTH COUNTY BOARD OF TAXATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided March 9, 1964.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Ralph S. Heuser argued the cause for appellant J.H. Becker, Inc. (Messrs. Heuser, Heuser & DeMaio, attorneys).

Mr. John C. Givens argued the cause for appellant John A. Gahler, et al. (Messrs. Parsons, Canzona, Blair & Warren, attorneys).

Mr. Vincent P. Keuper, attorney for respondents Township of Marlboro and George Wendel, filed a statement in lieu of brief.

Mr. Edward V. Torvak argued the cause for respondent United Appraisal Co. (Mr. Arthur J. Messineo, attorney).

Mr. Lawrence A. Carton, Jr. argued the cause for respondents Township of Holmdel and John W. Mount (Messrs. Roberts, Pillsbury & Carton, attorneys; Mr. H. Allen Roberts, on the brief).

Mr. Alan B. Handler, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent Monmouth County Board of Taxation (Mr. Arthur J. Sills, Attorney General, attorney).

Before Judges GOLDMANN, KILKENNY and COLLESTER.

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

This matter involves appeals from judgments entered in two actions in lieu of prerogative writs which were instituted in the Superior Court, Law Division, Monmouth County. In each case the trial court entered judgment dismissing the complaint. The appeals were consolidated for argument because they involve common questions of law and fact.

In appeal bearing docket number A-948-62 (hereafter referred...

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