Case law

Smith v. Whitaker

160 N.J. 221 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 20, 1999

, 8 N.J. 543, 555-56 , 86 A.2d 192 (1952) (noting remedial purpose of Wrongful Death Act and observing that from Act’s inception damages recoverable thereunder intended to be limited to “pecuniary injuries” sustained by qualified … Craig, 13 N.J.L. 294, 301 (Sup.Ct.1833), or “clearly excessive,” Leimgruber v. Claridge Assocs., 73 N.J. 450, 453, 375 A.2d 652 (1977).

Atlantic City Water Works Co. v. Read

50 N.J.L. 665 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1888

Halsted is clearly distinguishable from the present. In that case a lot of land for a court house was purchased and ordered to be paid for out of a future appropriation. … Unless city council had qualified its consent with some stipulation as to the quantity of water it should have supplied to it, and as to the price it should be charged for such supply, it *679 would have left the city entirely

State v. Evans

235 N.J. 125 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 28, 2018

The judge ruled that the officer's search incident to Evans's arrest could not alone qualify as an exception to the warrant requirement needed to authorize a strip search. … If probable cause is established, courts must explore exceptions to the warrant requirement.

Jackman v. Bodine

43 N.J. 453 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 25, 1964

It is one conceived out of compromise and concession indispensable to the establishment of our federal republic. … Although it is true that the people voted for the referendum as thus clearly limited and adopted also the constitution the Convention proposed, it would be quite unreal to say the people had a meaningful choice.

King v. Patterson

49 N.J.L. 417 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1887

agreement with the agency that all communications made by the agency, either verbally or through notification sheets, should be strictly confidential, and should be exclusively confined to the business of such subscribers’ establishments … Woodgate, 2 C., M. & R. 573, has clearly defined the term.

In re NJPDES Permit No. NJ0025241

185 N.J. 474 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 11, 2006

Such hearings are appropriate when there exist adjudicative facts in dispute. “ ‘The law clearly is, at a most elementary level, that because a trial is a process for taking evidence, subject to cross-examination, and because … Nonetheless, to qualify for “party” status under the WPCA, one must demonstrate a significant issue of fact or law for which an adjudicative hearing is required became there is a triable dispute concerning adjudicative facts

State ex rel. Fritts v. Kuhl

51 N.J.L. 191 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1889

The relator has referred to the proceedings of the constitutional convention of 1844 to establish his position. … provides that when a vacancy happens in the office of clerk or surrogate of any county (officers elected by the people), the governor shall fill such vacancy, and the commission shall expire when a successor is elected and qualified

Times of Trenton Publishing Corp. v. Lafayette Yard Community Development Corp.

183 N.J. 519 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 2005

endangered or the personal privacy or guaranteed rights of individuals would be clearly in danger of unwarranted invasion. *530 [N.J.SA. 10:4-7.] … Lafayette Yard argues that it is a private nonprofit corporation properly established under State law. See N.J.S.A 15A1-1 to - 10.

County of Hudson v. State

208 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 7, 2011

That is, the Contractual Liability Act effects a limited waiver of sovereign immunity. N.J.S.A 59:13-3. … Moreover, the detailed inmate-by-inmate census clearly identifies parole violators and on an individual basis calculates the days for which reimbursement was provided.

State v. Julie L. Michaels (072106)

219 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 6, 2014

There also was a section where “the SLD examiner who reviewed Caylor’s analysis certified that Caylor was qualified to conduct the BAC test, and that the ‘established procedure’ for handling and analyzing [the] sample ‘ha … Clearly, defendant could not cross-examine the machines themselves. See Jenkins v.

Johnson v. Johnson

204 N.J. 529 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 10, 2010

The arbitrator stated that divorce and remarriage “necessitates the need to more clearly establish boundaries between Mom’s house and Dad’s house.” … Obviously, evidential support establishing a prima facie case of harm will be required in order to trigger a hearing.

Mazzacano v. Estate of Kinnerman

197 N.J. 307 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 22, 2009

Opposed — None. 1 A social affair permit “authorized the sale of alcoholic beverages by the glass or other open receptacle by civic, religious, educational, veterans or other qualified organizations ... notwithstanding that … Today, the *319 term refers to "an establishment in which liquor is served to be consumed on the premises."

American Fire & Casualty Co. v. New Jersey Division of Taxation

189 N.J. 65 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 19, 2006

Moreover, “because tax liability is established by way of revenue legislation, all the rules of statutory construction are relevant.” Stryker Corp. v. … Equality or even-handed treatment is clearly the legislative purpose.” Ibid.

Association of New Jersey State College Faculties, Inc. v. Dungan

64 N.J. 338 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 5, 1974

Prior formal notice and opportunity for submission of statements and arguments would clearly have been the preferable course; but in the light of the foregoing assertions of belief by the Board we are not prepared to say, … The overall purpose, as evidenced throughout the entire resolution, is to avoid the granting of tenure to those not sufficiently qualified and to avoid the granting of tenure in such high proportion as to defeat the needed

In Re Venezia

191 N.J. 259 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 13, 2007

As clearly established in our case law, the Shield Law protects dissemination of information in the news reporting process. … To establish that Cherchi defamed him, Venezia must show that Cherchi stated to Glazer that Venezia was convicted of a crime. See DeAngelis v.

Lindquist v. City of Jersey City Fire Department

175 N.J. 244 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 11, 2003

Both experts were found to be qualified to render expert opinions under N.J.R.E. 702 by virtue of their “knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education.” Ibid. Dr. … However, courts must not penalize workers suffering from diseases for which science has not yet clearly established causation.

Asbury Park Press, Inc. v. Woolley

33 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 6, 1960

The legally qualified voters of the several counties are given the right under the Constitution to vote for all officers that are elective by the people. N. J. Const., Art. 2, par. 3. … Establishment of a similar vote value for each county for the total of 60 votes would constitute (it is said) exact representation according to the Constitution.

United New Jersey Railway & Canal Co. v. State Board of Assessors

75 N.J.L. 35 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 9, 1907

And this act contains the following clause as to taxation: “The consolidated corporation thus authorized to be formed shall be vested with and hold all the rights, titles, powers, franchises, privileges, properties, immunities … By this acceptance the contract for transit duties, in lieu of taxation, was by the first section of that act clearly abrogated by mutual agreement.

Fisch v. Manger

24 N.J. 66 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 1, 1957

L. 599 (E. & A. 1907), the court stressed that the constitutional language imports freedom from harm or substantial impairment but not “immunity from all regulation.” See State v. Maier, 13 N. J. 235, 276 (1953). … The separable issue of liability was clearly and properly decided against the defendants; under the evidence it could hardly have been determined otherwise and need not be submitted for redetermination. R.

State v. Laws

50 N.J. 159 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 25, 1967

In the circumstances, it would clearly disserve the interests of justice to ground a reversal on the exclusion of the witness’ mother. … A reading of his entire voir dire leaves one with the firm view that he was well qualified and was properly selected; in any event the trial judge did not exceed his broad discretion in declining to discharge Mr.