Case Name: NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE (NOW VERIZON WIRELESS); SMART SMR OF NEW YORK, INC., D/B/A NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, (NOW NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.); SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.; AND OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (NOW A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF VOICESTREAM WIRELESS), PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM AND THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM, DEFENDANTS, AND FRANCIS WOOD AND DAVID HINCKLEY, DEFENDANTS-INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 2004-10-27
Citations: 181 N.J. 387
Docket Number: 
Parties: NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE (NOW VERIZON WIRELESS); SMART SMR OF NEW YORK, INC., D/B/A NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, (NOW NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.); SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.; AND OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (NOW A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF VOICESTREAM WIRELESS), PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM AND THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM, DEFENDANTS, AND FRANCIS WOOD AND DAVID HINCKLEY, DEFENDANTS-INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Reports
Volume: 181
Pages: 387–388

Head Matter:
858 A.2d 1133
NEW YORK SMSA LIMITED PARTNERSHIP D/B/A BELL ATLANTIC MOBILE (NOW VERIZON WIRELESS); SMART SMR OF NEW YORK, INC., D/B/A NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, (NOW NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.); SPRINT SPECTRUM L.P.; AND OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. (NOW A WHOLLY OWNED SUBSIDIARY OF VOICESTREAM WIRELESS), PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS, v. TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT, AND THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM AND THE TOWNSHIP OF MENDHAM, DEFENDANTS, AND FRANCIS WOOD AND DAVID HINCKLEY, DEFENDANTS-INTERVENORS-APPELLANTS.
Argued October 13, 2004
Decided October 27, 2004.
Barry H. Evenchick, argued the cause for intervenors-appellants ON alder, Hayden & Brogan, attorneys).
John M. Mills, III, argued the cause for appellant (Mills & Mills, attorneys).
Gregory J. Czura, argued the cause for respondents (Czura Stilwell, attorneys; Mr. Czura and Kenneth J. Wilbur, on the briefs).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Parker's opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 366 N.J.Super. 141, 840 A.2d 901 (2004).
Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO join in this opinion.
For affirmance—Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, WALLACE, and RIVERA-SOTO—6.
Opposed—None.