# Lower Main Street Associates v. New Jersey Housing & Mortgage Finance Agency

> Supreme Court of New Jersey · February 22, 1989 · 114 N.J. 226

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9542102

## Case

- **Full name:** Lower Main Street Associates, a New Jersey Limited Partnership and a Limited Dividend Housing Association; And Union Plaza Associates, a New Jersey Limited Partnership and a Limited Dividend Housing Association, Plaintiffs-Appellants and Cross-Respondents, v. New Jersey Housing and Mortgage Finance Agency, State of New Jersey, Defendant-Respondent and Cross-Appellant
- **Court:** Supreme Court of New Jersey
- **Decided:** February 22, 1989
- **Citations:** 114 N.J. 226; 553 A.2d 798; 1989 N.J. LEXIS 20
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurrence by O'Hern
- **Judges:** Stein, O'Hern
- **Cited by:** 47 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9542102

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding the "flexibility" afforded agencies "does not allow an agency to ignore the [APA] dictates"
- recognizing that prepayment regulations are necessary to promote the legislative goals of providing affordable housing for the life of the mortgages

## Opinion text

O’HERN, J.,
concurring in part, dissenting in part.
With but one exception, I concur in the well-reasoned opinion of the majority. Adhering to views that I expressed in dissent in Woodland Private Study Group v. State, 109 N.J. 62, 76 (1987), I do not join that portion of Part II of the majority opinion that would require the agency to enact regulations prior to exercising its governmental power to permit prepayment of its mortgage. Would we say that the exercise of judgment by the board of directors of a commercial lender with respect to prepayment of a mortgage would be arbitrary unless it has written regulations in place before it exercises its judgment? Why must government always have paper in place before it acts? See Smith, “Judicialization: The Twilight of Administrative Law,” 1985 Duke L.J. 427 (administrative process has become so formalized that it has lost sight of original goal of effectuating governmental policy).
*245 O’HERN, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part.
For affirmance in part and reversal in pari—Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, GARIBALDI and STEIN—5.
Opposed—None.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9542102. Public record. Not legal advice.