City Of Newark v. Rockford Furniture Co.
| Decision Date | 20 June 1949 |
| Docket Number | No. A-317.,A-317. |
| Citation | 66 A.2d 743 |
| Parties | CITY OF NEWARK v. ROCKFORD FURNITURE CO. |
| Court | New Jersey Superior Court |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Division of Tax Appeals.
The City of Newark assessed realty owned by the Rockford Furniture Company, a corporation, and the taxpayer appealed to the county tax board whose decision was reversed by the Division of Tax Appeals. From a denial by the Division of Tax Appeals of Taxpayer's motion to dismiss the city's appeal from a judgment of the county tax board, the taxpayer appeals.
Judgment of Division of Tax Appeals reversed, and judgment of county tax board affirmed.
Before Judges JACOBS, EASTWOOD and BIGELOW.
Vincent J. Casale, Newark, argued the cause for plaintiff-respondent (Thomas L. Parsonnet, Newark, attorney).
Herman L. Fast, Newark, argued the cause for defendant-appellant (Fast & Fast, Newark, attorneys).
The opinion of the Court was delivered by EASTWOOD, J.A.D.
The question to be decided is whether R.S. 54:3-26, N.J.S.A., applies to a situation of an added assessment made under and by virtue of R.S. 54:4-63.1 et seq., N.J.S.A. We are convinced that it does apply.
The pertinent part of R.S. 54:3-26, N.J.S.A., provides: As amended L. 1946, c. 161, p. 730, s 18.
The pertinent part of the ‘added assessment’ law, R.S. 54:4-63.3, N.J.S.A., provides: ‘* * * the assessor shall, after examination and inquiry, determine the full and fair value of such parcel of real property as of the first of the month following the date of the delivery of such deed, or of such completion, and if such property was not assessed as of October first preceding or, if such value so determined exceeds the assessment made as of October first preceding, the assessor shall enter an assessment, as an added assessment against such parcel of real property, in the ‘Added Assessment List, 19,’ which assessment shall be determined as follows: by multiplying the amount of such assessment or such excess by the number of whole months remaining in the calendar year after date of delivery of such deed, or of such completion, and dividing the result by twelve.'
On October 1, 1945, defendant's real estate, the subject of the assessment under review, was owned by the Board of Education of the City of Newark and exempt, therefore, from taxation. On January 18, 1946, the Board of Education conveyed the property to Myerson & Erman, who conveyed it on June 3, 1946, to the defendant corporation. The property was assessed at $35,934, as of February 1, 1946, under authority of R.S. 54:4-63.3, N.J.S.A., for an eleven month period, and entered by the City Assessor in the ‘Added Assessment List, 1946’. An appeal was taken from the assessment to the Essex County Board of Taxation and reduced by that Board for 1946 to $27,200. No appeal was taken by the City to the State Division of Tax Appeals. The property was assessed as of October 1, 1946, for the tax year 1947, at $39,100, from which the taxpayer appealed to the County Tax Board and that Board reduced the assessment on the land to.$19,000. An appeal was taken to the Division of Tax Appeals and the Division reversed the County Tax Board, reinstating the original assessment of $39,100., representing $30,900. on the land and $8,200. on improvements. The Division of Tax Appeals denied defendant's motion to dismiss the City's appeal on the ground that R.S. 54:3-26, N.J.S.A., precluded same, from which denial defendant appeals to this court.
Appellant contends that R.S. 54:3-26, N.J.S.A., applies to a case of an added assessment. On the other hand, the plaintiff contends that this provision is only applicable to cases where the assessment is for the entire assessment year; that, assuming that R.S. 54:3-26, N.J.S.A., is applicable to ‘added assessments', having taken effect on April 25, 1946, the act was not retroactive and could not apply to the assessment levied here as of February 1, 1946; that, if the Legislature intended the act to apply to added assessments, it would have so stated, the act in question being devoid of any such legislative intent. We find no merit in plaintiff's contentions.
The amendatory act under which the added...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Newark v. Essex County Bd. of Taxation
...back and 'freezes' the assessment in the two subsequent years, in the absence of changes in value. See Newark v. Rockford Furniture Co., 4 N.J.Super. 205, 66 A.2d 743 (App.Div.1949); In re Strauss, 28 N.J.Super. 526, 101 A.2d 22 (App.Div.1953); Riverview Gardens v. North Arlington, 9 N.J. 1......
-
Brewer v. Porch
...Cty. Tax Bd., 51 N.J. 291, 240 A.2d 8 (1968); State v. Federanko, 26 N.J. 119, 139 A.2d 30 (1958); City of Newark v. Rockford Furniture Co., 4 N.J.Super. 205, 66 A.2d 743 (App.Div.1949). Where there are two contradictory provisions in a statute, the primary object is to ascertain the legisl......
-
Borough of Matawan v. Monmouth County Bd. of Taxation
...which is regarded as having adopted a new statute in light thereof and in reference thereto. City of Newark v. Rockford Furniture Co., 4 N.J.Super. 205 (66 A.2d 743) (App.Div.1949). 'Turning to the statute itself, it has been noted that the original enactment lasted ten years before amendme......
-
Appeal of New York State Realty & Terminal Co.
...N.J. 72, 85, 100 A.2d 869 (1953); Hackensack Water Co. v. Ruta, 3 N.J. 139, 147, 69 A.2d 321 (1949); City of Newark v. Rockford Furniture Co., 4 N.J.Super. 205, 66 A.2d 743 (App.Div.1949). Accordingly, we view the Added Assessments Law, N.J.S.A. 54:4--63.1 to 63.11, supra, as permitting add......