History
  • No items yet
midpage
Berninger v. BOARD OF ADJ. OF BOROUGH OF MIDLAND PARK
127 N.J. 226
| N.J. | 1992
|
Check Treatment
127 N.J. 226 (1992)
603 A.2d 946

MARK BERNINGER AND CAROL BERNINGER, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS,
v.
BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE BOROUGH OF MIDLAND PARK, MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE BOROUGH OF MIDLAND PARK, AND JOHANNA VOGEL, DEFENDANTS, AND ELIAS NOURY AND MARIE NOURY, HIS WIFE, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Argued January 22, 1992.
Decided March 18, 1992.

*227 William T. Smith argued the cause for appellants (Hook, Torack & Smith, attorneys).

John C. McGlade argued the cause for respondents (Lessack & McGlade, attorneys).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the majority opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 254 N.J. Super. 401, 603 A.2d 954 (1992).

O'HERN, Justice, dissenting.

I would reverse the judgment of the Law Division, substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Gaulkin's concurring and dissenting opinion, reported at 254 N.J. Super. 401, 603 A.2d 954 (1992).

Case Details

Case Name: Berninger v. BOARD OF ADJ. OF BOROUGH OF MIDLAND PARK
Court Name: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Date Published: Mar 18, 1992
Citation: 127 N.J. 226
Court Abbreviation: N.J.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.