Legal Opinion

Orloski v. Planning Bd.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided May 30, 1989PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

234 N.J. Super. 1 (1989)

559 A.2d 1380

FRANK ORLOSKI AND THELMA ORLOSKI, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,

v.

PLANNING BOARD OF THE BOROUGH OF SHIP BOTTOM, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.

Argued May 15, 1989.

Decided May 30, 1989.

Before Judges SHEBELL, GRUCCIO and LANDAU.

Thomas C. McCoy argued the cause for appellants (Woodland & McCoy, attorneys; Thomas C. McCoy, on the brief).

Granville D. Magee argued the cause for respondent (Magee and Graham, attorneys; Granville D. Magee, of counsel and on the brief).

2Per curiam

We affirm substantially for the reasons ably expressed by Judge…

3Cases cited4 opinions

  1. North Plainfield v. PeroneNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1959
  2. Cohen v. Fair LawnNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1964
  3. DeFelice v. ZONING BD. OF ADJ. OF BOROUGH OF POINT PLEASANT BEACHNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987
  4. State v. Farmland-Fair Lawn Dairies, Inc.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1961

4Cited by14 opinions

  1. Urban v. Planning BoardSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1991
  2. Aldrich v. SchwartzNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1992
  3. Berninger v. Board of AdjustmentNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1991
  4. Gandolfi v. Town of HammontonNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2004
  5. Urban v. Planning Bd.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1990

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API