City of Jersey City v. Beth-El Baptist Church

New Jersey Tax Court

City of Jersey City v. Beth-El Baptist Church

12 A.2d 152, 18 N.J. Misc. 208, 1940 N.J. Misc. LEXIS 28

CourtNew Jersey Tax Court

DecidedApril 2, 1940

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 12 A.2d 152 (City of Jersey City v. Beth-El Baptist Church) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Tax Court primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Jersey City v. Beth-El Baptist Church, 12 A.2d 152, 18 N.J. Misc. 208, 1940 N.J. Misc. LEXIS 28 (N.J. Super. Ct. 1940).

Pincite

Opinion

Quinn, President.

Respondent is a religious corporation of this state and is the owner of a two-family frame structure in the petitioner taxing district, which duly assessed the land and building for taxes- for the year 1938. On appeal, the Hudson County Board of Taxation canceled the assessment, and petitioner herewith appeals from that determination.

[209]*209Tlie proof before us is clear to the effect that the first floor of this property is exclusively devoted to the uses of a house of worship by the church, and that the second story is employed as a dwelling for its minister.

The statute exempts from taxation buildings exclusively devoted to religious worship and those actually occupied as a parsonage by the officiating clergyman of a religious corporation of the state. Pamph. L. 1918, ch. 236, § 203 (R. S. 54:4-3.6). It does not appear to us that any principle of statutory construction should operate to deprive the respondent of the Lax exemption obviously intended by the legislature in such a situation, by mere reason of the fact that one building houses both its church and its parsonage.

The judgment of the Hudson County Board cancelling the assessment in question, should be affirmed.

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

Quinn, President.

Respondent is a religious corporation of this state and is the owner of a two-family frame structure in the petitioner taxing district, which duly assessed the land and building for taxes- for the year 1938. On appeal, the Hudson County Board of Taxation canceled the assessment, and petitioner herewith appeals from that determination.

[209]*209Tlie proof before us is clear to the effect that the first floor of this property is exclusively devoted to the uses of a house of worship by the church, and that the second story is employed as a dwelling for its minister.

The statute exempts from taxation buildings exclusively devoted to religious worship and those actually occupied as a parsonage by the officiating clergyman of a religious corporation of the state. Pamph. L. 1918, ch. 236, § 203 (R. S. 54:4-3.6). It does not appear to us that any principle of statutory construction should operate to deprive the respondent of the Lax exemption obviously intended by the legislature in such a situation, by mere reason of the fact that one building houses both its church and its parsonage.

The judgment of the Hudson County Board cancelling the assessment in question, should be affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

12 A.2d 152, 18 N.J. Misc. 208, 1940 N.J. Misc. LEXIS 28, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-jersey-city-v-beth-el-baptist-church-njtaxct-1940.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack