179 Duncan Ave. Corp. v. Bd. of Adjustment of Jersey City
| Decision Date | 29 March 1939 |
| Citation | 5 A.2d 68,122 N.J.L. 292 |
| Parties | 179 DUNCAN AVENUE CORPORATION v. BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF JERSEY CITY et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Certiorari by the 179 Duncan Avenue Corporation against the Board of Adjustment of Jersey City and others challenging the legality of an order or resolution of the Board of Adjustment revoking a permit issued to prosecutor by the superintendent of buildings to make certain alterations in a business property.
Judgment in accordance with opinion. Argued before BROGAN, C. J., sitting alone pursuant to the statute.
Gross & Gross, of Jersey City, for prosecutor.
James A. Hamill and Charles A. Rooney, both of Jersey City, for defendants.
The writ challenges the legality of an order or resolution of the Board of Adjustment of Jersey City, revoking a permit issued to the prosecutor by the Superintendent of Buildings to make certain alterations in a business property. The underlying question is whether the premises of the prosecutor, known as 177-179 Duncan Avenue, which have been for many years devoted to commercial uses, shall be continued as such. The property previously had been used as a motion picture theatre, then as a tavern and, lastly, as a storage and repair shop.
The Superintendent of Buildings of the municipality, on regular application, issued a permit to install new plumbing and to change the store front. Contracts were let to accomplish these changes and the work begun. Subsequently, upon the protests of neighboring business people, a hearing was had before the Board of Adjustment, as a result of which the Board voided the permit issued to the prosecutor.
A reading of the minutes of the hearing before the Board of Adjustment, which is made part of the return to the writ, compels a conclusion that the objection to the alterations undertaken was grounded on the fact that the prosecutor intends to rent the premises to the King Cole Market. This is characterized in the minutes as a supermarket where meats, groceries and other necessary commodities will be sold at low prices at various stands in the premises.
Objections, the basis of which is that competition will result from the opening of a new market in the neighborhood, are without legal validity. That this is the basis of the protests is obvious. There is no power in the municipality to limit or regulate the use to which property may be put unless that limitation be within the provision of the statute (Cf. Chap. 274,...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Taxpayers Ass'n of Weymouth Tp., Inc. v. Weymouth Tp.
...241, 281 A.2d 513, 11 to protect local commercial establishments from undesired competition, 179 Duncan Ave. Corp. v. Jersey City Bd. of Adjustment, 122 N.J.L. 292, 5 A.2d 68 (Sup.Ct.1939), or to prevent whole classes of people from residing within a community, E.g., United States v. City o......
-
Baris Lumber Co. v. Town of Secaucus in Hudson County
...Phillips Oil Co. v. Municipal Council of City of Clifton, 120 N.J.L. 13, 197 A. 730 (Sup.Ct.1938); 179 Duncan Avenue Corp. v. Jersey City, 122 N.J.L. 292, 5 A.2d 68 (Sup.Ct.1939); Spur Distributing Co., Inc. v. Bridgeton, 122 N.J.L. 460, 6 A.2d 192 (Sup.Ct.1939). * * This plaintiff corporat......
-
Kreatchman v. Ramsburg
...Conn. 577, 95 A.2d 792; Benson v. Zoning Board of Appeals, 129 Conn. 280, 284, 27 A.2d 389, 391; 179 Duncan Ave. Corp. v. Board of Adjustment of Jersey City, 122 N.J.L. 292, 293, 5 A.2d 68; Lehrer v. Board of Adjustment of City of Newark, 137 N.J.L. 100, 58 A.2d 265; Town of Clinton v. Stan......
-
Frischkorn Const. Co. v. Lambert
...supra; Phillips Oil Co. v. Municipal Council of City of Clifton, 120 N.J.L. 13, 197 A. 730; 179Duncan Avenue Corporation v. Board of Adjustment of Jersey City, 122 N.J.L. 292, 5 A.2d 68;Spur Distributing Co., Inc., v. City Council of City of Bridgeton, 122 N.J.L. 460, 6 A.2d 192. Cf. Rescin......
-
Antitrust Aspects of Anticompetitive Zoning
...(dictum); Leher v. Board of Ad·justment, 137 N.J.L. 100, 58 A.2d 265 (1948); 179 Duncan Ave.Corp. v. Board of Adjustment, 122 N.J.L. 292, 5 A.2d 68 (1939);Pomerantz v. Lehmann, 55 Misc. 2d 315, 285 N.Y.S.2d 188 (Sup. Ct.1967); Spohrer v. Town of Oyster Bay, 29 Misc. 2d 366, 219N.Y.S.2d 376 ......