Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

1 S. TOLL BROS., INC., et al. v. THE PLANNING BOARD TOWNSHIP OF MT. OLIVE, et al. -- rank: 1000

... the tolling of the original ten-year extension pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. In addressing these questions, we acknowledge that what hangs in ... for a ten-year extension was granted in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. The judge gave the following explanation in support of his ... Cox, has noted that: While this application was made under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 . . . it should have been made under N.J.S.A ...

docket:	A2023-04
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2006-04-26
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	72220

2 S. TOLL BROS., INC., et al. v. THE PLANNING BOARD TOWNSHIP OF MT. OLIVE, et al. -- rank: 1000

... the tolling of the original ten-year extension pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. In addressing these questions, we acknowledge that what hangs in ... for a ten-year extension was granted in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. The judge gave the following explanation in support of his ... Cox, has noted that: While this application was made under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 . . . it should have been made under N.J.S.A ...

docket:	A2836-04
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2006-04-26
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	72219

3 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/supreme/a-83-84-85-18.opn.html -- rank: 945

... action instituted . . . to protect the public health and welfare.” N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. Here, the City has prevented Shipyard from moving forward with ... otherwise ready, willing and able to proceed with said development . . . . [N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21.] Here, the City has prevented Shipyard from moving forward with ...

docket:
court:	NJ Superior Court Law/Chancery Division
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	63444

4 WIDGEON POINT PRESERVATION ASSOCIATION v. BROADMOOR PROPERTIES, INC., et al. -- rank: 917

... the subdivision approval. It also sought a tolling, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21, for the twenty-two months in which Widgeon Point I ... be adversely impacted by the extension of the protections under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 applied, Broadmoor's approvals were "correctly tolled until March 2007 ... otherwise ready, willing and able to proceed with said development," N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21, in that it did not apply for a letter of ... was entitled to an extension of its approval pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21, which provides: In the event that, during the period of ... time said legal action is pending . . . . The tolling provision of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 does not "suspend the running of the protected period following ... 1, 2004 resolution, constituted "legal action instituted" by a "party." N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. It was instituted, in part, for the purpose of " ...

docket:	a4437-06
court:	njappellate
decided:	2008-04-02
status:	unpublished
citation:	*CITE_PENDING*
Document Size:	65865

5 FRIENDS OF PEAPACK-GLADSTONE v. BOROUGH OF PEAPACK-GLADSTONE LAND USE BOARD -- rank: 890

... s period of statutory protection from zoning changes, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21, had not lapsed. We now consider these arguments. II. Whispering ... 295 N.J. Super. 234 (App. Div. 1996) (same); cf. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 (emphasis added).] This tolling provision in N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 thereby can suspend the five-year statutory maximum period of ... concluded. Each of those events qualified under the terms of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 to toll the developer's period of protection from a ...

docket:	a4668-07
court:
decided:	2009-06-10
status:	Published
citation:	407 N.J. Super. 404 971 A.2d 449
Document Size:	107579

6 MICHAEL J. ROGERS v. HOLLAND TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD -- rank: 873

... and unreasonable because Blumberg did not satisfy the provisions of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. On February 22, 2010, plaintiffs moved for summary judgment. Defendants ... THE BOARD TO GRANT AN EXTENSION OF FINAL APPROVAL UNDER N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 Point 3 THE FACTS ADDUCED AT THE TWO REMAND HEARINGS ... RECORD THE PLAT OR SUPPORT THE FINAL APPROVAL EXTENSION UNDER N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 Point 4 THE TRIAL JUDGE ERRED IN REFUSING TO CONSIDER ... he failed to establish the necessary statutory prerequisites contained in N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21. We agree with plaintiffs that the statutory tolling provisions of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 require two predicates. The developer must demonstrate he was "prevented ... public health and welfare' to trigger the tolling protections of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21." Friends of Peapack-Gladstone , supra , 407 N.J. Super. ...

docket:	a1607-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-10-31
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	32608

7 THE LAST FRONTIER, INC v. BLAIRSTOWN TOWNSHIP ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -- rank: 828

... toll the effective time period of the variance. Plaintiff cites N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 and -22a in support of its argument, but the tolling ...

docket:	a5205-08
court:	superior court appellate division
decided:	2010-05-24
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	65283

8 S. DEVELOPMENT CO., INC. v. TOWNSHIP OF LYNDHURST ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT -- rank: 784

... forth in Ordinance � 19-2.10 was tolled pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 because of DPED's letter to Lyndhurst requesting that no ... building permit pending county review of a project. We disagree. N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 provides, in pertinent part, as follows: In the event that ... pass review by those three agencies, the tolling provisions of N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 do not apply to suspend the running of the protected ... Although the Legislature has enacted certain tolling provisions, such as N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 discussed above, they do not provide for tolling in the ...

docket:	a2925-07
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-03-12
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	40897

9 M. ALFIERI CO., INC. V. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AND ENERGY -- rank: 448

... Wetlands Protection Act. In addition, the tolling provision contained in N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21 does not preserve Alfieri's right to develop the property ...

docket:	a-23-94
court:	njsupreme
decided:	1995-01-12
status:
citation:	136 N.J. 30
Document Size:	16613

10 OAKS DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION v. THE PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWNSHIP OF OLD BRIDGE -- rank: 397

... the contractual and permit deadlines for the development pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-21, due to the pendency of these proceedings. The Authority opposed ...

docket:	a4741-11
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2013-10-08
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	60690