Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

1 VINCENT LEPORE v. BOROUGH OF SEA BRIGHT -- rank: 1000

... the ordinance, that defendant acted properly within the scope of N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, and that defendant's actions did not violate the Public ... by [defendant as] a public street.' For that reason, under N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, defendant 'determined that the public interest will be better served ... th[e] property' (count one). He also alleged defendant 'violated [ N.J.S.A.] 40:67-19 by illegally vacating a public street, for the 'selfish' reasons ... waters and views of the Shrewsbury River.' He argued that N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 does not facially apply because the statute requires that a ... challenge the [O]rdinance,' and that defendant 'did not violate N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.' In support, defendant filed the certification of Joseph Verruni, the ... defendant] and that [defendant's] actions [were] in compliance with N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.' Further, she found that the modest increase in defendant' ...

docket:	a4370-17
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2020-01-14
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	28913

2 HOWELL PROPERTIES, INC. v. TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, et al. -- rank: 949

... vacation of the streets do not serve the "public interest." N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     The essential facts are not in dispute. The subject property ... municipality may enact an ordinance to vacate a public street. N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.             Whenever there shall have been a dedication of lands as ... of this title concerning ordinances for the vacation of streets.         [ N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 (emphasis added).] Plainly, the controlling criterion under the statute is ... consideration of regional needs, the phrase "public interest," used in N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, likewise demands that a municipality look beyond its own borders ... Bi-County , is whether such action served "the public interest." N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     Defendants' vacation ordinances essentially trump Wall Township's reasonable efforts ... ordinances constitute an invalid use of defendants' legislative power under N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     Brick also argues that plaintiff has no right to ...

docket:	a5782-99
court:	njappellate
decided:	2002-02-13
status:	published
citation:	347 N.J. Super. 573
Document Size:	42980

3 HOWELL PROPERTIES, INC. v. TOWNSHIP OF BRICK, et al. -- rank: 949

... vacation of the streets do not serve the "public interest." N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     The essential facts are not in dispute. The subject property ... municipality may enact an ordinance to vacate a public street. N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.             Whenever there shall have been a dedication of lands as ... of this title concerning ordinances for the vacation of streets.         [ N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 (emphasis added).] Plainly, the controlling criterion under the statute is ... consideration of regional needs, the phrase "public interest," used in N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, likewise demands that a municipality look beyond its own borders ... Bi-County , is whether such action served "the public interest." N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     Defendants' vacation ordinances essentially trump Wall Township's reasonable efforts ... ordinances constitute an invalid use of defendants' legislative power under N.J.S.A. 40:67-19.     Brick also argues that plaintiff has no right to ...

docket:	a5965-99
court:	njappellate
decided:	2002-02-13
status:	published
citation:	*CITE_PENDING*
Document Size:	42956

4 546 OG, LLC v. BOROUGH OF EDGEWATER -- rank: 866

... the complaint, plaintiff alleged the ordinance failed to comply with N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 because it did not maintain plaintiff's 'right to access ... Plaintiff makes no such constitutional argument here. Instead, relying on N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, plaintiff argues simply that the public interest was not 'better ...

docket:	a1474-21
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2023-08-28
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	28113

5 Township of Middletown v. Richard Simon, et al. -- rank: 768

... a dedication may pass an ordinance to that effect. See N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 (“[T]he governing body may by ordinance release and ...

docket:	a-85-06
court:
decided:	2008-01-15
status:
citation:	193 N.J. 228
Document Size:	97394

6 ROBERT BARAN et al. v. TOWNSHIP OF PLUMSTED, et al. -- rank: 756

... 03-16 was enacted pursuant to the authority contained in N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, was not thereby enacted pursuant to the Municipal Land Use ...

docket:	A1497-04
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2005-12-19
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	75613

7 JOANN DEPHILIPPO v. CINNAMINSON TOWNSHIP PLANNING BOARD -- rank: 752

... of public roads could only be effected by complying with N.J.S.A. 40:67-19. Ibid. In reasoning that the map was not conclusive proof ... J.S.A. 40:55D-32 in such a way, N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 would be wholly "superfluous" because townships could vacate existing public ...

docket:	a5837-12
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-11-07
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	62871

8 BAKER RESIDENTIAL, L.P. v. TOWNSHIP OF WASHINGTON -- rank: 596

... SITE PLAN APPROVAL, [AND] THEREFORE PLANTIFFS' RIGHTS VESTED PURSUANT TO [ N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, which provides that: [w]henever there shall have been a ... at 576-77. We concluded that the "public interest" under N.J.S.A. 40:67-19 cannot be confined exclusively "to the parochial interest of the ...

docket:	a5816-06
court:	njappellate
decided:	2009-01-22
status:	unpublished
citation:	*CITE_PENDING*
Document Size:	49370

9 TOWNSHIP OF MIDDLETOWN v. RICHARD SIMON, et al. -- rank: 533

... dedication only by adoption of an ordinance in conformity with N.J.S.A. 40:67-19, see En glander v. Twp. of W. Orange , supra , 224 ...

docket:	A1938-04
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2006-07-31
status:	published
citation:
Document Size:	36831