B.P.U.M. Development & Urban Renewal Corp. v. City of Camden

11 N.J. Tax 95
CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
DecidedMay 1, 1989
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 11 N.J. Tax 95 (B.P.U.M. Development & Urban Renewal Corp. v. City of Camden) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
B.P.U.M. Development & Urban Renewal Corp. v. City of Camden, 11 N.J. Tax 95 (N.J. Ct. App. 1989).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Substantially for the reasons expressed in his opinion reported at 9 N.J.Tax. 490 (1988), we conclude that Judge Lario correctly held (1) that both the Urban Renewal Law (N.J.S.A. 40:55C-40 et seq.) and the Tax Abatement Law (N.J.S.A. 54:4-3.95 et seq.) require “the acceptance and execution of appropriate agreements as a precondition for an eligible project to receive tax abatement” and (2) that “there exists no equitable reason to waive the statutory prerequisites.” B.P.U.M. Dev. & Urb. Renewal v. Camden, 9 N.J.Tax. at 502-503, 507.

The judgment is accordingly affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

Fifth Roc Jersey Associates, L.L.C. v. Town of Morristown
26 N.J. Tax 212 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2011)
Lowe's Home Centers, Inc. v. City of Millville
25 N.J. Tax 591 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2010)
Town of Secaucus v. City of Jersey City
20 N.J. Tax 384 (New Jersey Tax Court, 2002)
City of Asbury Park v. Castagno Tires
13 N.J. Tax 488 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1993)
In Re AWB Associates, G.P.
144 B.R. 270 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 1992)
Tru Urban Renewal Corp. v. City of Newark
11 N.J. Tax 63 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1990)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
11 N.J. Tax 95, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bpum-development-urban-renewal-corp-v-city-of-camden-njsuperctappdiv-1989.