Midland Park Coal Lumber Co., Inc. v. Terhune

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Midland Park Coal Lumber Co., Inc. v. Terhune

61 A.2d 76, 137 N.J.L. 603, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 323

Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided September 3, 1948·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion below excepting that portion dealing with the authority to regulate by zoning the use of vacant lands in general. Since the land in dispute is to be used in conjunction with presently owned yards and buildings of the appellant, both premises are regarded as a unit and subject to the prevailing zoning restrictions.

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Bobine, Heher, Wacheneelb, Burling, Jacobs, . Wells, Dill, Freunb, McLean, JJ. 10.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Schettino, JJ. 2.

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

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed, for the reasons expressed in the opinion below excepting that portion dealing with the authority to regulate by zoning the use of vacant lands in general. Since the land in dispute is to be used in conjunction with presently owned yards and buildings of the appellant, both premises are regarded as a unit and subject to the prevailing zoning restrictions.

For affirmance — The Chief Justice, Bobine, Heher, Wacheneelb, Burling, Jacobs, . Wells, Dill, Freunb, McLean, JJ. 10.

For reversal — The Chancellor, Schettino, JJ. 2.

Midland Park Coal Lumber Co., Inc. v. Terhune, 61 A.2d 76, 137 N.J.L. 603, 1948 N.J. LEXIS 323 (N.J. 1948).

Pincite

61 A.2d 76 (Midland Park Coal Lumber Co., Inc. v. Terhune) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related