The Supreme Court has granted review in four more cases.  In Cherokee LCP Land, LLC v. City of Linden Planning Bd., the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Do plaintiffs have a sufficient interest in the property adjacent to the property to be developed (the development property), such that they have standing to challenge the municipal planning board’s site plan approval for the development property?”

An award of attorneys’ fees is at the heart of Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc.   The quest

Ten years ago today, the Supreme Court decided Gallenthin Realty Development, Inc. v. Borough of Paulsboro, 191 N.J. 344 (2007).  It was the first time that the Court focused on the meaning of the term “blighted areas” in Article VII, section 3, paragraph 1 of the New Jersey Constitution,a provision that allows such areas to be taken by eminent domain for redevelopment purposes.

The case arose from the Borough’s designation of plaintiff’s 63-acre parcel of largely vacant wetlands as property “in need of redevelopment”under the Local Redev

In making up for lost time, a separate post was warranted to take note of three new grants of review by the Supreme Court.  The cases address very different areas of the law.

The biggest of the three cases may be Freedom From Religion Foundation v. Morris Cty. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders.  The Court granted certification and accelerated this appeal.  The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Does the County’s voter-approved program providing grants to non-pr