Rowatti v. Gonchar
New Jersey Supreme Court
101 N.J. 46, 500 A.2d 381 (1985)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
John and Nina Gonchar (plaintiffs) got a building permit and a variance from the town of Northvale to build an addition on their home. The permit allowed the Gonchars to build an apartment onto their home to accommodate Nina’s elderly mother. The apartment was attached to the original house but was a self-contained apartment with its own entrance, kitchen, heating system, and utilities. After the Gonchars broke ground for the addition, their neighbors, Carl and Adrianne Rowatti (defendants), challenged the Gonchars’ addition before the municipal zoning board. The Rowattis argued that the Gonchars’ plan to build a self-contained apartment onto their home would convert the home into a multifamily dwelling. The municipal zoning plan prohibited multifamily dwellings. During the pendency of the zoning board action, the Gonchars were permitted to continue construction at their own risk. The Gonchars substantially completed construction before the zoning board issued a ruling. The zoning board ruled that the addition of a self-contained apartment onto the Gonchars’ home converted the home into a multifamily residence. Because multifamily residences were prohibited under Northvale’s zoning regulations, the zoning board ordered the addition to be either torn down or altered to comply with zoning regulations. The Gonchars appealed the zoning board’s decision.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)
Dissent (Stein, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 802,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
