Case Name: SEATRAIN LINES, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BOROUGH OF EDGEWATER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1983-03-21
Citations: 192 N.J. Super. 535
Docket Number: 
Parties: SEATRAIN LINES, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BOROUGH OF EDGEWATER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Superior Court Reports
Volume: 192
Pages: 535–536

Head Matter:
SEATRAIN LINES, INC., PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. BOROUGH OF EDGEWATER, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued March 1, 1983
Decided March 21, 1983.
Before Judges FRITZ, JOELSON and PETRELLA.
Steven Muhlstoek argued the cause for appellant (Melvin Gittleman, attorney).
Thomas E. Durkin, Jr. argued the cause for respondent (Dennis A. Durkin, on the brief).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We are persuaded, as was the Tax Court judge, that this matter is governed by the principles explicated in Newark v. Central & Lafayette Realty Co., Inc., 150 N.J.Super. 18 (App. Div.1977), certif. den. 75 N.J. 528 (1977). To the extent that Rothman v. River Edge, 149 N.J.Super. 435 (App.Div.1977), certif. den. 75 N.J. 19 (1977), decided one day earlier than Newark v. Central & Lafayette Realty Co., Inc., differs with the latter case, we prefer Newark v. Central & Lafayette Realty Co., Inc., not because it is later in time but because we believe it to be the better reasoned case.
We affirm, 4 N.J.Tax 378, substantially for the reasons set forth by the Tax Court judge in his written determination of May 26, 1982.