Legal Opinion
Amerada Hess Corp. v. Burlington County Planning Board
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided July 16, 2008No. A-41 September Term 2007PublishedCited by 6 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtJustice Long
At issue on this appeal is the meaning of N.J.S.A. 40:27-6.7, a provision of the County Planning Act (CPA) that directs that a completed land use application is automatically deemed approved if the county planning board fails to take official action within thirty days, or within sixty days if both the municipal planning board and the applicant consent. There is no provision in the CPA for an extension of those time limits.
In Manalapan Holding Co. v. Planning Board of Hamilton, 92 N.J. 466, 457 A.2d 441 (1983), in interpreting an automatic approval provision in the Municipal Land Use Law…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Knorr v. SmealSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2003
- Toll Bros., Inc. v. BD. OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS, CTY. OF BURLINGTONSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
- Manalapan Holding Co. v. Planning Board of HamiltonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1983
- Lizak v. FariaSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1984
- Fallone Properties, L.L.C. v. Bethlehem Township Planning BoardNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2004
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by6 opinions
- Dunbar Homes, Inc. v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment of the Twp. of FranklinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2018
- Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
- Henry v. New Jersey Department of Human ServicesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2010
- Johnson v. Ocean City Planning BoardSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2008
- Philomeno & Salamone v. Board of SupervisorsSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2009
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.