DeBOLD v. TOWNSHIP OF MONROE


114 N.J. Super. 502 (1971)

277 A.2d 404

WILLIAM DEBOLD, GEORGE FULLER AND FREDERICK SMITHLINE, TRUSTEES IN LIQUIDATION OF CAMBRIDGE DEVELOPMENT CORP., A NEW JERSEY CORP., PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF MONROE, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, MONROE PLANNING BOARD AND JOSEPH INDYK, INDIVIDUALLY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided May 11, 1971.


Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Mr. Stanley Tannenbaum argued the cause for appellants (Messsr. Reibel, Isaac, Tannenbaum & Epstein, attorneys).

Mr. Richard S. Cohen argued the cause for respondents Township of Monroe and Joseph Indyk.

Mr. Joseph L. Stonaker argued the cause for respondent Monroe Planning Board.

Messrs. Hutt and Berkow filed a brief amicus curiae for New Jersey Builders Association (Mr. Stewart M. Hutt, of counsel and on the brief, appeared; Mr. Richard W. Kracht, on the brief).

Before Judges LEWIS, MATTHEWS and MINTZ.


PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in the reported opinion of Judge Furman, 110 N.J.Super. 287.

This affirmance is without prejudice to plaintiffs' right to apply to the Board of Adjustment of the Township of Monroe for variances from the 1957 zoning ordinance for their respective parcels...

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