Bloomfield 206 Corp. v. City of Hoboken, 2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2175 (App. Div. Sept. 4, 2014). It is not the goal of this blog to publicize the successes of my firm, Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC. Nonetheless, we have recently had a run of successes in the Appellate Division, especially in the area of municipal law, as discussed here, here, and here. Today, the Appellate Division affirmed rulings by four different Law Division judges in this rent control case, another victory for my partner Victor Afanador.
The facts and procedural history of the case are convoluted, as evidenced by the fact that four different Law Division judges had pieces of it. In short, the Appellate Division upheld the actions of the Hoboken Rent Leveling and Stabilization Board in determining the rent for a particular rent-controlled apartment. The panel rejected the efforts of plaintiff, a frequent litigant against the City and its Rent Board, to obtain injunctive relief and a damages judgment under the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. §1983 (embarrassingly, plaintiff’s complaint had repeatedly demanded relief under 28 U.S.C. §1984, a non-existent provision, as the panel noted). Because, however, one of the decisions of the Law Division did not relate to a final judgment, the Appellate Division noted that that aspect of the case could now be reinstated. Thus, the case may live on to that extent.
The Appellate Division was gracious enough to identify each of the four Hudson County judges whose decisions were being affirmed. They are the late Judge Tolentino and Judges Bariso, Mantineo, and Royster.