From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Project Holding, Inc. v. Smyth

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Mar 15, 1979
166 N.J. Super. 354 (App. Div. 1979)

Opinion

Argued February 27, 1979 —

Decided March 15, 1979.

Appeal from the Superior Court, Chancery Division, Hudson County.

Before Judges MATTHEWS, KOLE and MILMED.

Mr. William Goldberg argued the cause for appellants.

Mr. Laurence B. Orloff argued the cause for respondent ( Messrs. Orloff, Lowenbach, Stifelman Siegel, attorneys; Messrs. Laurence B. Orloff, Jeffrey M. Garrod and Raymond A. Brown on the brief).


We agree with Judge Kentz that the Anti-Eviction Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1 et seq. is inapplicable to the factual circumstances presented in this case. Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the reasons expressed in his opinion reported at 152 N.J. Super. 582, insofar as they reach that conclusion.

Since we find N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.1 et seq. inapplicable, it is unnecessary for us to decide whether its literal application would violate the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution of the United States. See 152 N.J. Super. at 598 to 600.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed for the reasons herein stated.


Summaries of

Project Holding, Inc. v. Smyth

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Mar 15, 1979
166 N.J. Super. 354 (App. Div. 1979)
Case details for

Project Holding, Inc. v. Smyth

Case Details

Full title:PROJECT HOLDING, INC., A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, AND…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Mar 15, 1979

Citations

166 N.J. Super. 354 (App. Div. 1979)
399 A.2d 1033

Citing Cases

Salb v. Lemoine Avenue Associates

Removal of such tenants is governed by an entirely different statutory scheme, N.J.S.A. 2A:18-53. Since…

Project Holding Inc. and Action Committee v. Smyth

Petition for certification denied. (See 166 N.J. Super. 354)…