Case Name: TOWNSHIP OF HOLMDEL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1992-12-03
Citations: 130 N.J. 522
Docket Number: 
Parties: TOWNSHIP OF HOLMDEL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Judges: Concurring in result —Justices O’HERN and STEIN — 2.
Reporter: New Jersey Reports
Volume: 130
Pages: 522–529

Head Matter:
617 A.2d 656
TOWNSHIP OF HOLMDEL, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Argued September 30, 1992
Decided December 3, 1992,
Mary R. Hamill, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for appellant (Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Mary C. Jacobson, Deputy Attorney General, of counsel).
Frederick W. Rose argued the cause for respondent (Young, Rose, Imbriaco & Burke, attorneys; Mr. Rose, Gianfranco A. Pietrafesa, and J. Andrew Kinsey, on the brief).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 12 N.J.Tax 112 (1991).