Witt v. Borough of Maywood
Cases that cite this one
9 later published cases cite this decision.
- Deegan v. Perth Amboy Redevelopment Agency (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2005)
- Apache Auto Wreckers, Inc. v. Village of Ridgefield Park Zoning Board (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026)
- Vincent Blehl v. the Planning Board of the Borough of Saddle River (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2024)
- 1 MEMORIAL DRIVE LLC VS. 160 WEST BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LP RIVERVIEW TOWERS I, LLC VS. 160 WEST BROADWAY ASSOCIATES, LP (L-3874-17 AND L-3935-17, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2021)
- BERGEN RIDGE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. TOWNSHIP OF NORTH BERGEN PLANNING BOARD (L-1791-14, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018)
- BRIAN KIMMINS VS. BOROUGH OF BRIELLE PLANNING BOARD(L-2949-15, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017)
- Dock St. Seafood, Inc. v. City of Wildwood (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2011)
- Infinity Broadcasting v. NJ MEADOWLANDS (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2005)
- In re Reorganization of Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange of New Jersey (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2000)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion
Dennis WITT and Lynn Witt, individually and as members of Maywood Property Owners Association, Plaintiffs-Appellants,
v.
BOROUGH OF MAYWOOD, Defendant-Respondent, and
Commerce Bank, Defendant/Intervenor-Respondent.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division.
Segreto & Segreto, Haledon, for plaintiffs-appellants (James V. Segreto, of counsel and on the brief).
Rupp & Ten Hoeve, Hackensack, for defendant-respondent Borough of Maywood (William F. Rupp, on the brief).
DeCotiis, FitzPatrick & Gluck, Teaneck, for defendant/intervenor-respondent Commerce Bank (James A. Farber, on the brief).
Before Judges PRESSLER, LANDAU and CIANCIA.
PER CURIAM.
Plaintiffs Dennis Witt and Lynn Witt, individually and as members of Maywood Property Owners Association appeal from paragraphs one and two of a final judgment dated June 30, 1998 that dismissed with prejudice the consolidated complaints in Witt v. Borough of Maywood, Docket No. L-7444-96 and Witt v. Borough of Maywood, Docket No. L-2481-97. The dismissed complaints challenged the validity of a re-zoning ordinance and an exchange of easement ordinance adopted by the Borough.
Upon review of the arguments raised on appeal, we affirm, substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Jonathan Harris in his comprehensive opinion reported at 328 N.J.Super. 432, 746 A.2d 73 (Law Div. 2000).
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.