N.J. Stat. » Title 40 — MUNICIPALITIES AND COUNTIES
New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 40:55D-18 (2026)

Enforcement

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

9. Enforcement. The governing body of a municipality shall enforce this act and any ordinance or regulation made and adopted hereunder. To that end, the governing body may require the issuance of specified permits, certificates or authorizations as a condition precedent to (1) the erection, construction, alteration, repair, remodeling, conversion, removal or destruction of any building or structure, (2) the use or occupancy of any building, structure or land, and (3) the subdivision or resubdivision of any land; and shall establish an administrative officer and offices for the purpose of issuing such permits, certificates or authorizations; and may condition the issuance of such permits, certificates and authorizations upon the submission of such data, materials, plans, plats and information as is authorized hereunder and upon the express approval of the appropriate State, county or municipal agencies; and may establish reasonable fees to cover administrative costs for the issuance of such permits, certificates and authorizations. The administrative officer shall issue or deny a zoning permit within 10 business days of receipt of a request therefor. If the administrative officer fails to grant or deny a zoning permit within this period, the failure shall be deemed to be an approval of the application for the zoning permit. In case any building or structure is erected, constructed, altered, repaired, converted, or maintained, or any building, structure or land is used in violation of this act or of any ordinance or other regulation made under authority conferred hereby, the proper local authorities of the municipality or an interested party, in addition to other remedies, may institute any appropriate action or proceedings to prevent such unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair, conversion, maintenance or use, to restrain, correct or abate such violation, to prevent the occupancy of said building, structure or land, or to prevent any illegal act, conduct, business or use in or about such premises.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2018–2026 · leading case: Harz v. Borough of Spring Lake, 191 A.3d 547 (N.J. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Harz v. Borough of Spring Lake, 191 A.3d 547 (N.J. 2018). · cites it 2× “Whatever may be the nature or the scope of the right to be heard on an appeal from a zoning officer's decision, the Borough did not violate a substantive right as envisaged under the Civil Rights Act.”
Ramapo Hunt & Polo Club Ass'n, Inc. Vs. Ramapough Mountain Indians, Inc. (l-3189-17 & L-6409-17, Bergen Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2021). · cites it 8× “Our review of the record reveals that on May 9, 2017, the Township of Mahwah (the Township) filed a complaint against RMI to enjoin violations of the Township's zoning ordinance pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18 because RMI appeared to be erecting buildings or other prohibited…”
Steven Schulz v. the Borough of West Long Branch (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026). · cites it 7× “Schulz filed a four-count complaint for: a writ of mandamus against Miller and Frank; an enforcement action pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18 of the Municipal Land Use Law (MLUL), N.”
Forrest Hill Cmty. Ass'n, Inc. v. Pub. Servs. Elec. & Gas Co. (D.N.J. 2022). · cites it 6× “Sixth, there are certain actions that do not require permits. Those actions include changes to the interior of a structure, see Newark, N.”
Sandra Lema v. the Borough of Garwood (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2025). · cites it 5× “As to the Borough Defendants, plaintiffs alleged: (1) improperly expanded non-conforming use of the Property (count one); (2) the Borough is required to enforce its own ordinances under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18 (count two); (3) the Board declining to rule on their appeal and…”
Richard Gianacakos Vs. Hudson River Crossfit (c-000127-17, Hudson Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2020). · cites it 4× “The trial court also found plaintiffs were "interested" parties under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18, allowing them to enforce the Hoboken municipal sound ordinance.”
Constantine Matthews Vs. Charles Ehrmann (c-000064-17, Passaic Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). · cites it 3× “N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18. Private, "interested parties," such as a neighboring property owner, can also enforce zoning ordinances.”
Congregation Sons of Israel v. Congregation Meorosnosson, Inc. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026). · cites it 3× “"11 According to the judge, by its actions, "the Board 11 The judge elaborated that Sections 18-905 and 18-906 of the Lakewood Zoning Ordinance "pertain[] to parking and buffer requirements" for places of worship and public and private schools respectively and that "neither…”
Marc E. Godlewski Vs. Borough of Stone Harbor (l-0351-16, Cape May Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018). “See N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18 (authorizing "the proper local authorities of the municipality or an interested party, in addition to other remedies, [to] institute any appropriate action or proceedings to prevent such unlawful erection, construction, reconstruction, alteration, repair,…”
Twp. of Howell v. Sprouts Pma (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2024). “The Township's reliance upon N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18, which permits it to "institute any appropriate action or proceeding" did not permit it to proceed summarily pursuant to Rule 4:67-1.”
Vincent A. Villano v. Sal Madison, LLC (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2024). “N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18. An interested party is "any person .”
The Nar Grp., Inc. v. Save Lebanon Twp. Coalition (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2025). “1 The complaint in the First lawsuit alleged: plaintiff's application was automatically approved in accordance with N.J.S.A. 40:55D-18 and -46 (counts one and two); the Township planning board's decision that it lacked jurisdiction to review plaintiff's site plan application was…”
Show all 13 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.