The court rejected Union’s attempt to find the area located at the intersection of Stuyvesant and Morris Avenues to be an area in need of redevelopment. The court identified a misapplication of the law by the Planning Board based on the erroneous advice of counsel, which was misleading in its use of the term “blighted area.”
Related appellate victories and redevelopment decisions from Carlin, Ward, Ash & Heiart.
Carlin, Ward, Ash & Heiart LLC represented adjoining property owners in the challenge to a condemnation redevelopment area. The matter was quickly resolved once a complaint was filed and the City agreed to remove the properties from the condemnation redevelopment area.
CWAH partner, Michael J. Ash, represents SFIII Kinderkamack in this pending appeal. As part of a recently published opinion in SF III Kinderkamack, LLC v. Borough of Oradell, the Tax Court of New Jersey clarified its earlier decision in Mobil Administrative Services Co. v. Mansfield Twp. to hold that a...
On appeal, the appellate court overturned the decision of the trial court, and found that the record lacked adequate basis for finding that the property was a blighted redevelopment area.