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.

Fee v. College Towers Apartments

July 18, 2008

ROBERT A. FEE AND VICTORIA FEE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
COLLEGE TOWERS APARTMENTS, SECTION ONE, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, AND DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, AND THE CITY OF JERSEY CITY, DEFENDANT.



On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Hudson County, Docket No. L-5598-04.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued December 3, 2007

Before Judges Parrillo, Graves and Alvarez.

Plaintiffs Robert A. Fee and Victoria Fee appeal from an order entered on August 15, 2006, dismissing their complaint and entering judgment for possession in favor of defendant College Towers Apartments, Section One (College Towers) on its counterclaim. For the reasons set forth in a sixty-page written decision, the trial court found plaintiffs were in default of their Occupancy Agreement for failing to occupy their apartment.

On appeal, plaintiffs present the following arguments:

POINT I

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT DEFENDANT COLLEGE TOWERS' STATUS AS A LIMITED DIVIDEND HOUSING CORPORATION WAS NOT TERMINATED IMMEDIATELY AFTER FEBRUARY 8, 2004.

POINT II

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT DEFENDANT COLLEGE TOWERS' TAX EXEMPTION DID NOT EXPIRE AS OF FEBRUARY 8, 2004 AND THAT THE EXTENSION OF SUCH BY THE CITY TO JUNE 30, 2006 WAS LEGAL.

POINT III

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE EQUITABLE DEFENSES OF LACHES AND/OR ESTOPPEL PRECLUDED THE PLAINTIFFS FROM CHALLENGING OR OBJECTING TO THE EXTENSION OF THE TAX EXEMPTION AND/OR 1997 SETTLEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND DEFENDANT COLLEGE TOWERS.

POINT IV

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING THAT THE PLAINTIFFS BREACHED THEIR OCCUPANCY AGREEMENT BY MAINTAINING THEIR PRINCIPAL RESIDENCE ELSEWHERE.

POINT V

THE TRIAL COURT ERRED IN FINDING, AND EVEN CONSIDERING, THAT THE PLAINTIFFS WERE NEVER QUALIFIED SHAREHOLDERS ...


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.