Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Ass'n of Methodist Episcopal Church v. Reeves

79 A. 1119, 80 N.J.L. 464, 51 Vroom 464, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 137
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided March 6, 1911·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

We concur in the result reached by the Supreme Court in this ease, and agree in the main with the reasoning set forth in the opinion delivered for that court hy Mr. Justice Trenehard. We are not to be understood as approving the declaration that: “In general, a tenant is not assessed for his interest in the land, because, presumably, it has no value. The rent which he pajrs is ordinarily all that the land is worth. The estate for years has no market value in such cases,” &c. Nor arc we prepared to adopt the comment upon the decision of this court in Ocean Grove Association v. Sanders, 39 Vroom 631. Those portions of the opinion referred to are not, as we think, at all essential to the line of reasoning.

The judgment under review should he affirmed, with costs.

For affirmance—The Chancellor, Chief Justice, Garrison, Bergen, Yoorhees, Mintukn, Bogert, Vredeerurgh, Yroom, Congdon, JJ. 10.

For reversal—None.

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

Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Ass'n of Methodist Episcopal Church v. Reeves, 79 A. 1119, 80 N.J.L. 464, 51 Vroom 464, 1911 N.J. LEXIS 137 (N.J. 1911).

79 A. 1119 (Ocean Grove Camp Meeting Ass'n of Methodist Episcopal Church v. Reeves) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Renaissance Plaza Associcates v. City of Atlantic City
18 N.J. Tax 342 (New Jersey Tax Court, 1998)
1330 Connecticut Avenue, Inc. v. District of Columbia Zoning Commission
669 A.2d 708 (District of Columbia Court of Appeals, 1995)