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.

Stephanatos v. Township of Wayne

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION


March 19, 2008

BASIL N. STEPHANATOS, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
TOWNSHIP OF WAYNE AND DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

On appeal from the Tax Court of New Jersey, Docket No.007234-2005.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Submitted December 5, 2007

Before Judges Parker and R. B. Coleman.

Plaintiff Basil Stephanatos appeals from an order entered by the tax court on September 26, 2006 denying his motion for reconsideration of an order entered on July 10, 2006 dismissing the complaint and denying plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.

In his complaint, relying on the Law Division decision in Robinson v. Cahill, 118 N.J. Super. 223 (Law Div. 1972), aff'd in part, mod in part, 62 N.J. 473 (1973), cert. denied sub nom; Dickey v. Robinson, 414 U.S. 976, 94 S.Ct. 292, 38 L.Ed. 2d 219 (1973), the United States Constitution, the Declaration of Independence and United States Supreme Court cases, plaintiff alleges that his constitutional rights are violated by financing public education through his property taxes. In his decision, Judge Harold A. Kuskin found that plaintiff's claims for the years 1995 through 2001 were not timely and then rendered a well-reasoned decision as to why the remainder of plaintiff's claim could not survive defendant's summary judgment motion.

In this appeal, plaintiff argues that (1) the tax court failed to address several constitutional issues raised by him; and (2) the tax court "made numerous harmful errors and/or overlooked controlling decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court and other state Supreme Courts."

We have carefully considered the record in light of plaintiff's arguments and we are convinced they lack sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11- 3(e)(1)(E). We affirm substantially for the reasons stated by Judge Kuskin in his well-reasoned decision rendered on the record of June 23, 2006.

Affirmed.

20080319

© 1992-2008 VersusLaw Inc.



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.