Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Podcasts Blogs -> New Jersey Law Blog
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Podcasts
: New Jersey Law BlogError Alone is not Sufficient for Relief Under the Correction of Errors Statute
By Timothy P. Duggan
My blog post dated January 28, 2008, provides an overview of the New Jersey Correction of Errors Statute and explains when a property owner is entitled to go back in time and get a refund due to an error made by a tax assessor. On June 22, 2010, the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey once again confirmed the legal principal that an error alone is not enough for relief - the correction must also be self-evident. (See case here)
From 1996 through 1998, a property owner received a 20% credit on the value of her land since the land was encumbered with a conservation easement. When the municipality completed its revaluation in 1999, it did not consider conservation easements in reducing land values (an obvious error). In 2005, the municipality performed a reassessment and all land values were substantially increased. In 2005, the subject property's assessment went from $222,000 to $479,000, again with no deduction for the conservation easement (the error continues!).
In 2008, the property owner noticed that she was not receiving a reduction or any type of credit for the conservation easement encumbering her property. On November 26, 2008, she filed a complaint with the Tax Court seeking a reduction for the tax years 2005 through 2008, arguing the error was the type of error subject to correction under the Correction of Error Statute.
The Tax Court and the Appellate Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey disagreed. The Court acknowledged that the municipality's failure to take the conservation easement into account when assessing the plaintiff's property was an error in assessment. However, the Tax Court continued that once the error was determined 'it would have been necessary for the assessor to exercise her judgment as to how much that conservation easement would reduce [the land value of the property], that is clearly an error of judgment and not one of correctable error.'
This case underscores the requirement that not only must there be an error, but the correction itself must be 'self-evident.' The only true way to avoid this problem is to diligently review your tax assessments on an annual basis
Full post as published by New Jersey Law Blog on July 05, 2010 (boomark / email).
The Mortgage Forgiveness Debt Relief Act
Phantom Income Relief on Debt Cancellation
Mylicon Baby's Gas Relief Drops
Urgently Recalled Nationwide
FDA Warns of Potentially Fatal Errors with GDH-PQQ Glucose Monitoring Technology
Glucose Monitoring Technology FDA Warns of Potentially Fatal Errors
Medical Tubing Errors Leading to Adverse Events Including Death
Medical Tubing Errors Leading to Adverse Events Including Death
Medical Errors
Annual Cost to Insurers Nearly $1.5 Billion
Dobutamine Hydrochloride Injection
Labeling Errors Prompts Recall of 250 mg/20 ml Injections

Correcting Mistakes in Tax Assessments
Fixing Errors in Westlaw and Lexis Versions of Documents
God Forbid That Some For-Profit Business Should Benefit While You Help Your Colleagues
Fixing Errors in Westlaw Versions of Documents:
Oldfather on the Purposes of Appellate Review








