Legal Opinion
Leimann v. Board of Adjustment, Cranford Tp.
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided May 5, 1952PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
9 N.J. 336 (1952)
88 A.2d 337
RONALD R. LEIMANN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE TOWNSHIP OF CRANFORD, UNION COUNTY, NEW JERSEY; NICHOLAS TOMASULO, ELIZABETH TOMASULO, JOSEPH P. TOMASULO AND GRACE TOMASULO, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
The Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Argued March 24, 1952.
Decided May 5, 1952.
Mr. Ira D. Dorian argued the cause for appellant.
Mr. Ellsworth J. Sterner argued the cause for respondents.
The opinion of the court was delivered by WILLIAM J. BRENNAN, JR., J.
Determining that "by reason of the exceptional and peculiar shape of the premises and by reason of…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- Brandon v. Board of Commissioners of MontclairSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1940
- Brandon v. Board of CommissionersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1940
- Monmouth Lumber Co. v. Township of OceanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
- Lumund v. Bd. of Adjustment of the Borough of RutherfordSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1950
- Home Builders Ass'n of Northern NJ v. PARAMUS BOR.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1951
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- DeSimone v. Greater Englewood Housing Corp. No. 1Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1970
- Rexon v. BD. OF ADJUSTMENT, BOROUGH OF HADDONFIELDSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
- Cobble Close Farm v. Bd. of Adjustment, Middletown Tp.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1952
- Bogert v. Township of WashingtonSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1957