HARCLAY HOUSE ASSOCIATES v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE,

Annotate this Case
This case can also be found at 344 N.J. Super. 296, 781 A.2d 1085.
 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE
 
APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
 
 

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
APPELLATE DIVISION
A-4601-99T5

HARCLAY HOUSE ASSOCIATES,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

CITY OF EAST ORANGE,

Defendant-Respondent.

_____________________________________

Argued: September 12, 2001 - Decided: October 9, 2001
 
Before Judges A. A. Rodr guez and Lefelt.
 
On appeal from a final judgment of the Tax Court of New Jersey.
 
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).
 

PER CURIAM
Harclay House Associates (Harclay) 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 rent/income" is correct as a matter of law and, therefore, the Tax Court should have accepted it. The Tax Court found that Harclay 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.

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.