Case Name: HARCLAY HOUSE ASSOCIATES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 2001-10-09
Citations: 344 N.J. Super. 296
Docket Number: 
Parties: HARCLAY HOUSE ASSOCIATES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Superior Court Reports
Volume: 344
Pages: 296–296

Head Matter:
781 A.2d 1085
HARCLAY HOUSE ASSOCIATES, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued September 12, 2001
Decided October 9, 2001.
Steven R. Irwin, argued the cause for appellant (Mandelbaum & Mandelbaum, attorneys; Mr. Irwin, on the brief).
John F. Casey, argued the cause for respondent ('Wolff & Samson, attorneys; Mr. Casey, on the brief).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Harelay House Associates (Harelay) appeals from the judgment of the Tax Court, affirming a real property assessment by the City of East Orange. We affirm.
Harclay's sole argument on appeal is that its methodology in establishing "fair rental value" or "economic reni/income" is correct as a matter of law and, therefore, the Tax Court should have accepted it. The Tax Court found that Harelay failed to overcome the presumption of validity or correctness which attaches to the assessment. We agree with the Tax Court and affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Joseph Small in the opinion published at 18 N.J.Tax 564 (2000).
Affirmed.