Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

City of Plainfield v. State Board of Tax Appeals

New Jersey Supreme Court


Decided: August 23, 1940.

CITY OF PLAINFIELD, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, PROSECUTOR,
v.
STATE BOARD OF TAX APPEALS AND FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CO., RESPONDENTS (&C., NINE TITLES IN ALL AS ON "ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SERVICE" FILED HEREWITH)

On application for writs of certiorari.

For the prosecutor, William Newcorn.

For the respondents Plainfield Insuring Agency and Robert C. Callard, Harvey Rothberg.

For the respondent Carl Bishop, Ralph J. Smalley.

For the respondents N.J. & S. Realty Co., Jessie Munger and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp., Allan Krieger.

For the respondent Plainfield Plaza, Norman Abrams.

For the respondent Charles T. Elliott, William P. Elliott.

Before Justice Case, sitting alone pursuant to the statute.

Case

[125 NJL Page 187] CASE, J. The city of Plainfield applies for writs of certiorari to review the determinations of the State Tax Board of Tax Appeals reducing the assessments on nine separately

[125 NJL Page 188]

owned properties. A number of the properties are in the heart of the business section. A few are located within the likely march of business. At least two are in choice residential districts.

The need for review is more obvious in some of the cases than in others. But all bear in varying degrees upon the question of relative land values. If the values are soundly fixed at the reduced figures, it is likely that the level of valuations throughout the city will need to be lowered. The issue is consequently of broad significance.

The valuations have gone through the statutory course -- made by the local assessors, appealed to the county board of taxation and again appealed to the state board. Of the nine cases the county board affirmed the original assessments in three and granted reductions in six. The state board in every instance reduced the assessment below that fixed by either the assessors or the county board; and inasmuch as the testimony was taken before a single member, the board finding really rests upon the typed page rather than upon the accumulated impressions created by heard and observed witnesses.

Under all of the circumstances the city should have the review for which it asks. The writs applied for will be allowed.

19400823


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.