Popular Refreshments, Inc. v. Fuller's Milk Bar & Rec. Ctr., 44 N.J. 409 (N.J. 1965). · Go Syfert
Popular Refreshments, Inc. v. Fuller's Milk Bar & Rec. Ctr., 44 N.J. 409 (N.J. 1965). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
“if planning boards had no alternative but to rubber-stamp their approval on every subdivision plat which conformed with the zoning ordinance, there would be little or no reason for their existence”
22 citation events (3 in the last 25 years) across 5 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Pizzo Mantin Group v. Township of Randolph (njsuperctappdiv, 1993-02-04)
Treatment trajectory · 1965 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1965 1995 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (quoted) Pizzo Mantin Group v. Township of Randolph
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · 1993 · signal: see also · quote attribution · 1 verbatim quote · confidence low
if planning boards had no alternative but to rubber-stamp their approval on every subdivision plat which conformed with the zoning ordinance, there would be little or no reason for their existence
cited Cited "see" NL Industries, Inc. v. Commercial Union Insurance
D.N.J. · 1993 · signal: see · confidence high
See Cooper v. Gov’t Employees, 51 N.J. at 94, fn. 3 , 237 A.2d 870 , citing Mariani v. Bender, 85 N.J.Super. 490, 500 , 205 A.2d 323 (App.Div. 1964), cert. denied, 44 N.J. 409 , 209 A.2d 143 (1965).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
POPULAR REFRESHMENTS, INC., PLAINTIFF-PETITIONER,
v.
FULLER'S MILK BAR AND RECREATION CENTER, ET AL., DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Feb 4, 1965.
44 N.J. 409

Messrs. Gelman & Gelman and Mr. Newton M. Roemer for the petitioner.

Mr. Victor P. Mullica for the respondent.

Denied.