1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. N.J.
  4. 287 N.J.
  5. 287 N.J. Super. 114 (1996)
 

DORCHESTER MANOR v. BOROUGH OF NEW MILFORD

287 N.J. Super. 114 (1996)

670 A.2d 576

DORCHESTER MANOR, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT/CROSS-RESPONDENT, v. BOROUGH OF NEW MILFORD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT/CROSS-APPELLANT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Decided January 23, 1996.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Gary D. Gordon argued the cause for appellant/cross-respondent (Feinstein, Raiss & Kelin, attorneys; Mr. Gordon on the brief).

Paul P. Josephson argued the cause for respondent/cross-appellant (Sills, Cummis, Zuckerman, Radin Tischman, Epstein & Gross, attorneys; Mr. Josephson, of counsel and on the supplemental letter brief; Ross L. Yustein, of counsel and on the brief).

Before Judges DREIER and ARNOLD M. STEIN.

The opinion of the court was delivered by ARNOLD M. STEIN, J.A.D.

The judgment of the Law Division is affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Kole in Dorchester Manor v. Borough of New Milford, 287 N.J.Super. 163, 670 A.2d 600 (Law Div. 1994). Judge Kole balanced the critical factors of the Borough's budgetary constraints...

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