SOUTHBRIDGE PARK, INC. v. FORT LEE BOR, N.J. Tax, Judgment, Law, casemine.com

Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Report a problem

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Saul A. Wolfe argued the cause for appellant ( Skoloff Wolfe, attorneys
Saul A. Wolfe of counsel
on the brief). Steven Muhlstock argued the cause for respondent ( Melvin Gittleman, attorney
Steven Muhlstock on the brief).

Judges

PER CURIAM.

Are you a practicing lawyer?

Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.

Upload pleading to use the new AI search

Click here to upload

Cites

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Attorney(S)

Saul A. Wolfe argued the cause for appellant ( Skoloff Wolfe, attorneys
Saul A. Wolfe of counsel
on the brief). Steven Muhlstock argued the cause for respondent ( Melvin Gittleman, attorney
Steven Muhlstock on the brief).

Judges

PER CURIAM.

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

SOUTHBRIDGE PARK, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the Tax court, substantially for the reasons given by John J. Hopkins, J.T.C. in his opinion in this matter published in 4 N.J. Tax 30 (1981). We add that by reason of the stipulation entered into by plaintiff at the pretrial conference we conceive no reason for a remand.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Try AI Pro free for 7 days Upgrade to AI Pro

SOUTHBRIDGE PARK, INC. v. FORT LEE BOR

SOUTHBRIDGE PARK, INC., PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Comments