54:4-23. All real property shall be assessed to the person owning the same on October 1 in each year. The assessor shall ascertain the names of the owners of all real property situate in his taxing district, and after examination and inquiry, determine the full and fair value of each parcel of real property situate in the taxing district at such price as, in his judgment, it would sell for at a fair and bona fide sale by private contract on October 1 next preceding the date on which the assessor shall complete his assessments, as hereinafter required; provided, however, that in determining the full and fair value of land which is being assessed and taxed under the Farmland Assessment Act of 1964, chapter 48, laws of 1964, the assessor shall consider only those indicia of value which such land has for agricultural or horticultural use as provided by said act; and provided further however, that when the assessor has reason to believe that property comprising all or part of a taxing district has been assessed at a value lower or higher than is consistent with the purpose of securing uniform taxable valuation of property according to law for the purpose of taxation, or that the assessment of property comprising all or part of a taxing district is not in substantial compliance with the law and that the interests of the public will be promoted by a reassessment of such property, the assessor shall, after due investigation, make a reassessment of the property in the taxing district that is not in substantial compliance, provided that (1) the assessor has first notified, in writing, the mayor, the municipal governing body, the county board of taxation, and the county tax administrator of the basis of the assessor's determination that a reassessment of that property in the taxing district is warranted and (2) the assessor has submitted a copy of a compliance plan to the county board of taxation for approval. In the case of real property located in a county participating in the demonstration program established in section 4 of P.L.2013, c.15 (C.54:1-104), the assessor of the municipality in which the real property is situate, after due investigation, shall make a reassessment of the property in the taxing district that is not in substantial compliance. Following a reassessment of a portion of the taxing district pursuant to the provisions of this section, the assessor shall certify to the county board of taxation, through such sampling as the county board of taxation deems adequate, that the reassessment is in substantial compliance with the portions of the taxing district that were not reassessed. For the purposes of assessment, the assessor shall compute and determine the taxable value of such real property at the level established for the county pursuant to law.
Notes of Decisions
GGI Props., LLC v. City of Millville (In re GGI Props., LLC), 588 B.R. 401 (Bankr. D.N.J. 2018).
· cites it 5× “GGI then cites N.J.S.A. 54:4-23 for the proposition that an assessor has a duty to maintain assessments at "the full and fair value of each parcel of real property situate in the taxing district at such price as, in his judgment, it would sell for at a fair and bona fide sale by…”
City of Elizabeth v. 264 First Street, LLC, 28 N.J. Tax 408 (N.J. Tax Ct. 2015).
· cites it 2× “What is a ‘reassessment’ under N.J.S.A. 54:4-23. Plaintiff next argues the assessor’s actions do not constitute a “reassessment” of property in the taxing district.”
Mocco v. City of Jersey City (In Re Mocco), 222 B.R. 440 (Bankr. D.N.J. 1998).
““True value” requires the court to “[d]etermine the full and fair value of each parcel of real property at such price as it would sell for at a fair and bona-fide sale for a private contract on October 1 .”
Brunetti v. Cherry Hill Twp., 21 N.J. Tax 80 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2002).
“2 (1989) N.J.S.A. 54:4-23 imposes a duty upon the assessor to review assessments annually and to revise them in light of changed valuation factors affecting individual properties.”
BASF Corp. Coating & Ink Div. v. Town of Belvidere, 22 N.J. Tax 550 (N.J. Tax Ct. 2005).
“Defendant contends that the increase in the 2004 assessment on the Subject Property and the continuation of the increase in tax year 2005 were proper because the increase constituted assessment maintenance permitted under N.J.S.A. 54:4-23, even as amended by Chapter 101.”
Highpoint at Lakewood Condo. Ass'n v. The, 121 A.3d 413 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2015).
“See N.J.S.A. 54:4-23. 18 A-2118-13T2 (approving taxation of development rights to construct unbuilt condominium units).”
Delaware, Lackawanna & W. R. Co. v. Kingsley, 189 F. Supp. 39 (D.N.J. 1960).
“” N.J.S.A. 54:4-23. Plaintiffs charge that whereas the State Constitution and State law require all real estate, both that designated as Class II railroad property and other non-railroad property, to be assessed at true value, the assessors of the different taxing districts…”
AVR Realty Co. v. Cranford Twp., 16 N.J. Tax 550 (N.J. Tax Ct. 1997).
“N.J.S.A. 54:4-23 requires a municipal assessor to determine the “full and fair value” of each parcel of real property within the taxing district as of October 1st of each pretax year.”
Bloomingdale's, Inc. v. Hackensack City (N.J. Tax Ct. 2022).
· cites it 9× “” N.J.S.A. 54:4-23. Nonetheless, a tax assessor’s “fulfillment of the statutory obligation cannot, of course, conflict with constitutional limitations.”
Jovsim, LLC Vs. City of New Brunswick (tax Court to New Jersey) (Consol.), No. A-4832-18/A-4833-18 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Nov. 17, 2021).
· cites it 6× “On appeal, plaintiff makes two arguments contending that the Tax Court erred in failing to grant it summary judgment because (1) the reassessment was an unconstitutional spot assessment; and (2) the City's tax assessor violated N.J.S.A. 54:4-23 by not undertaking a reassessment…”
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.