New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, 2022

CHARLES DEEGAN v. BOROUGH OF STONE HARBOR PLANNING BOARD (L-0098-20 AND L-0110-20, CAPE MAY COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

CHARLES DEEGAN v. BOROUGH OF STONE HARBOR PLANNING BOARD (L-0098-20 AND L-0110-20, CAPE MAY COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Decided October 18, 2022

CHARLES DEEGAN v. BOROUGH OF STONE HARBOR PLANNING BOARD (L-0098-20 AND L-0110-20, CAPE MAY COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-2991-20 CHARLES DEEGAN and MARIE DEEGAN, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. BOROUGH OF STONE HARBOR PLANNING BOARD and CHARLES STREET DEVELOPERS, LLC, Defendants-Respondents. ______________________________ RKH HOLDINGS, LLC, WILLIAM S. ROOHAN, LYNN D. ROOHAN, CRAIG OTTON, PATRICIA K.

DIMARCO-SHESTON, STEPHEN M. HARBAUGH, JEFFREY RIHN, and BERNADETTE M. PARZYCH, Plaintiffs, v. BOROUGH OF STONE HARBOR PLANNING BOARD and CHARLES STREET DEVELOPERS, LLC, Defendants-Respondents. ______________________________ Submitted October 11, 2022 – Decided October 18, 2022 Before Judges Mayer, Enright, and Bishop-Thompson.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Cape May County, Docket Nos. L-0098-20 and L-0110-20.

Fox Rothschild, LLP, attorneys for appellants (Jack Plackter and Amanda Moscillo, on the briefs).

Craig, Annin & Baxter, LLP, attorneys for respondent Borough of Stone Harbor Planning Board (John C.

Grady, on the brief).

Hankin, Sandman Palladino Weintrob & Bell, PC, attorneys for respondent Charles Street Developers, LLC (Colin G. Bell, on the brief).

PER CURIAM The court being advised by the parties in the above matter that the issues in dispute have been amicably resolved, the appeal is accordingly dismissed with prejudice and without costs to either party.

A-2991-20

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.