
    JOHN W. RIEHM AND DORIS N. RIEHM, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. DIRECTOR, DIVISION OF TAXATION, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT.
    Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
    Argued December 10, 1985
    Decided January 22, 1986.
    Before Judges SHEBELL and MATTHEWS.
    
      Gerald C. Neary argued the cause for appellants (Pitney, Hardin, Kipp & Szuch, attorneys; Gerald C. Neary and Elizabeth J. Sher on the brief).
    
      
      Jeanne E. Gorrissen, Deputy Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent (Irwin I. Kimmelman, Attorney General, attorney; Jeanne E. Gorrissen, Michael R. Cole, First Assistant Attorney General of counsel and James J. Ciancia, Assistant Attorney General of counsel, on the brief).
   PER CURIAM.

We affirm the judgment of the Tax Court substantially for the reasons given by Judge Lasser in his reported opinion. As noted in the opinion, the “absence of harm” to the plaintiffs in Salorio v. Glaser, 93 N.J. 447, 461 A.2d 1100 (1983), cert. den. 464 U.S. 993, 104 S.Ct. 486, 78 L.Ed.2d 682 (1983) was not a “controlling” consideration, and, therefore, the “presence of harm” to plaintiffs in this case was also not a controlling consideration. Riehm v. Taxation Div. Director, 7 N.J.Tax 88, 95 (Tax Ct.1984).

Affirmed.  