PARK CENTER AT ROUTE 35, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
The ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE TOWNSHIP OF WOODBRIDGE, Defendant-Respondent, and
Dr. Norman Nepo and Gordon Berkow, Defendants/Intervenors; Respondents.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.https://leagle.com/images/logo.png
Argued September 30, 2003.
Decided January 2, 2004.
Attorney(s) appearing for the Case
Stewart M. Hutt, Woodbridge, argued the cause for appellant (Hutt & Shimanowitz, attorneys; Mr. Hutt, of counsel and on the brief; Jonathan G. Burnham, on the brief).
Timothy M. Casey, Woodbridge, argued the cause for respondent Zoning Board of Adjustment of the Township of Woodbridge (Russo & Casey, attorneys; Mr. Casey, on the brief).
Gordon Berkow, respondent, argued the cause pro se.
Sodini & Spina, attorneys for respondent Dr. Norman Nepo (Patrick J. Spina, of counsel).
Before Judges SKILLMAN, WELLS and FISHER.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
The opinion of the court was delivered by FISHER, J.A.D.
In Fieramosca v. Tp. of Barnegat,335 N.J.Super. 526, 762 A.2d 1075 (Law Div. 2000), Judge Serpentelli considered the question—not previously addressed by our courts—whether, in granting a land use application, a local agency is precluded from enforcing a condition if it failed to specifically include that condition...
Let's get started
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.
