Case Name: BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT
Court: New Jersey Superior Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New Jersey
Decision Date: 1993-06-30
Citations: 13 N.J. Tax 323
Docket Number: 
Parties: BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Judges: 
Reporter: New Jersey Tax Court Reports
Volume: 13
Pages: 323–323

Head Matter:
BOROUGH OF FORT LEE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
Argued June 8, 1993—
Decided June 30, 1993.
Before Judges MICHELS and BILDER.
Harry Haushatter argued the cause for appellant (Conley & Haushatter, attorneys; Mr. Haushatter, of counsel and on the brief).
Gail L. Menyuk, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Robert J. Del Tufo, Attorney General, attorney; Joseph L. Yannotti Assistant Attorney General, of counsel; Ms. Menyuk, on the brief).

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
These are consolidated appeals involving the computation of Fort Lee's ratio appearing on the Table of Equalized Valuations of October 1, 1991 and of October 1, 1992. The Tax Court opinion with respect to the 1991 appeal (A-3536-91) is reported at 12 N.J.Tax 299 (Tax Ct.1992). The 1992 appeal involves precisely the same issues; the 1991 record has been made part of the record for this appeal.
We affirm substantially for the reasons given by Judge Small in his published decision reported at 12 N.J.Tax 299 (Tax Ct.1992).