The following is a brief summary of major pending litigation:

1. Abrasive Distributors v. Teaneck:  In this zoning case, the former owner of property on the corner of Cedar Lane and Palisade Avenue (including the site of a very large and old oak tree) sued Teaneck claiming that Teaneck had made it difficult for it to sell its property at a reasonable price, by, among other things, attempting to declare the oak tree an historic site, and dissuading purchasers from buying the property. Teaneck denied these claims and moved for summary judgment in order to win the case without a trial. As of the end of 1998, no decision had been made on our motion for summary judgment

2. Meridian Construction v. Teaneck:  The general contractor for the recently completed Police Department building commenced an arbitration proceedings to collect $28,121.52, the balance claimed due it under its contract. Teaneck objected to paying the general contractor because the building has had many leaks, causing substantial water damage. As a result, Teaneck counterclaimed for its own damages of $111,500.00. The case was tried in a series of arbitration hearings by an arbitrator appointed by the American Arbitration Association. As of the end of 1998 the hearings had concluded, briefs were submitted, and a decision by the Arbitrator was expected in the Spring of 1999.

3. Glenpointe v. Teaneck:  Glenpointe sued to invalidate an amendment to our zoning ordinance providing for communications equipment on the roof of the hotel but prohibiting such equipment on the roof of the two office buildings at Glenpointe. Glenpointe claims that when the project was first set up in 1977, the Town contracted to let it have the buildings and "appurtenant improvements", which they say now includes communications antennae, and that the Town agreed never to "abrogate any of the terms of the ordinance that set up Glenpointe. Glenpointe also alleges that regulations of the Federal Communications Commission preempt the field and that neither Teaneck nor any other municipality has any right to enact an ordinance affecting antennas and satellite dishes. As of the end of 1998, pretrial proceedings had been completed and the case was awaiting trial.

4. Mulder v. Teaneck:  This is a zoning case in which a challenge was made to the validity of Teaneck's Ordinance governing affordable housing. The Plaintiff constructed a building without the required set aside of affordable units. Trial was held in October of 1998. Teaneck's position was sustained, and the Plaintiff will pay to Teaneck the sum of $50,000.00 for violations of the affordable housing ordinance.

5. Various Self-Insurance Fund cases:  Since Teaneck is self-insured for most accident cases (other than automobile) we defend claims involving damages alleged to have been caused on our streets, parks, and other public property. At the end of the year there were 17 such cases being defended by the Township Attorney.

6. Various State Tax Court Appeals:  There are numerous State Tax Court Appeals being defended by the Township Attorney. Most of these cases involve commercial or industrial properties. Several of the cases are by institutions requesting exemption from all real estate taxes. These cases will be tried throughout 1999

7. Various Construction Cases:  From time to time, when residents seriously violate Building Department regulations, it is necessary to take them to Teaneck Municipal Court to try and obtain compliance with the law. Teaneck is mainly concerned with having the violations removed and the unsafe conditions cleared up, but the law provides penalties and the fines for noncompliance can be quite high. In the event that compliance and payment of fines is not made, Teaneck has the option of enforcement in the Municipal or the Superior Court. These cases concern the failure on the part of homeowners to obtain certificates of occupancy, building permits for extensions, required inspections, etc.

General Information of Legal Department

The Township's Legal Department comprises attorneys serving the Township, the Planning Board, the Zoning Board of Adjustment, the Rent Board, the Civilian Complaint Review Board, the Environmental Commission, and the Historic Preservation Commission, as well as a Labor Attorney, a Municipal Prosecutor and a Public Defender. Each of these attorneys is in private practice and serves the Township on a part-time basis. The Township Code of Ethics bars each of the appointed attorneys, and other members of their firms, from appearing before any Township agency, board or department on behalf of private clients.

Apart from litigation, the members of the department serve the municipal government in a number of ways. They attend all meetings of the boards to which they are assigned, they render advisory opinions to municipal appointed and elected officials, and they facilitate the business of government, including drafting public contracts and local laws. The Municipal Prosecutor and the Public Defender attend all sessions of the Municipal Court, where the Prosecutor presents all criminal charges on behalf of the Township and the Police Department, and the Public Defender assists those defendants that cannot afford legal counsel. The Public Defender also acts as legal counsel to the Civilian Complaint Review Board.

The Municipal Attorney may also serve as attorney for the Self-Insurance Commission which administers the self-insurance program. That program, in existence since 1976, covers all risks in Teaneck except for fire damage to major buildings and liability for automotive equipment.

Back to 1999 Teaneck Municipal Services

Back to Home