Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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

Tzeses v. Barbahenn

Decided: January 28, 1941.

LEO TZESES, RELATOR-RESPONDENT,
v.
EDWIN W. BARBAHENN, BUILDING INSPECTOR OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MAPLEWOOD, NEW JERSEY, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT



On appeal from the Supreme Court.

For the respondent-appellant, Abram H. Cornish (Otto A. Stiefel, of counsel).

For the relator-respondent, Kristeller & Zucker (Saul J. Zucker, of counsel).

Campbell

The opinion of the court was delivered by

CAMPBELL, CHANCELLOR. This is an appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, which ordered that a peremptory writ of mandamus issue directed to the appellant to forthwith issue to the respondent certain building permits for which application had been denied.

The respondent is the owner of premises on the easterly side of Maplewood avenue, which are located in a "one-family residence district B" zone as fixed by the provisions of the zoning ordinance of the township.

The dimensions of the entire plot are as follows: front line, 100 feet; rear line, 91.31 feet; northerly side line, 283.71 feet; and, southerly side line, 276 feet. The respondent filed with the appellant applications for building permits to erect two one-family residences on the above plot, having divided the plot in half for building purposes so that each lot had a front line of 50 feet, a depth of more than 275 feet, and an area of more than 13,000 square feet. The rear lines of each lot are 45.65 feet and 45.66 feet, respectively, indicating that the plot tapers toward the center as the side lines approach the rear line.

The permits were refused by the appellant on the ground that the applications did not comply with the provisions of the zoning ordinance in that the lots did not have "a minimum frontage of fifty feet."

The pertinent provisions of the ordinance are as follows:

"5. Restrictions in Use, Applicable Only to One Family Residence District B.

"In one family residence District B, the size of lots, * * * shall be not less than indicated in the following schedule:

"Lots shall have a minimum frontage of 50 feet; a minimum depth of 100 feet and a minimum ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

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