Summary of Matthews v. Bay Head Improvement Association, Supreme Ct. of NJ (1984)
Parties: PL is a Public Advocate, lead PL (of over 100) is a Point Pleasant resident. DF is neighborhood association.
Cause of action/remedy sought: The following is an
Procedural History: Original suit dismissed b/c Bay Head did not control the beach.
Facts: What are the essential facts?
Issue(s): Under NJ property law, ancillary to the public’s right to enjoy the tidal lands, does the public have a right to gain access through and to use the dry sand area when it is not owned by a municipality but by a quasi-public body?
Holding: What conclusions did court reach (i.e., how did it answer the question posed above)?
Court’s Rationale/Reasoning: Why did they reach this conclusion and what are the possible effects of this decision?
Rule: What is the method by which the court reached those conclusions (what law did the court use and how did it apply
that law to the facts of this case)?
Did court avoid issues?: did it sidestep any questions that it initially appeared that it would have to answer?
Dicta: did the court make any statements about the law beyond what was needed to solve this case?