Case Name: MICHAEL & HELEN KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT; MORRIS & SANDRA LISMAN-KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 2009-02-11
Citations: 24 N.J. Tax 415
Docket Number: 
Parties: MICHAEL & HELEN KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. MORRIS & SANDRA LISMAN-KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Tax Court Reports
Volume: 24
Pages: 415–416

Head Matter:
MICHAEL & HELEN KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT. MORRIS & SANDRA LISMAN-KAPLAN, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued January 27, 2009
Decided February 11, 2009.
Ronald S. Blumstein, argued the cause for appellants.
Ramanjit K. Chawla, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Anne Milgram, Attorney General, attorney; Lewis Scheindlin, Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ms. Chawla, on the brief).
Before Judges SKILLMAN, GRAVES and GRALL.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The judgments of the Tax Court are affirmed substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Kuskin's opinion reported in 23 N.J.Tax 594 (2008).