Case law

Richard Rivera v. Union County Prosecutor’s Office (084867) (Union County & Statewide)

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 14, 2022

Section 9(b) clearly exempts internal affairs reports from public disclosure. … Here, we find that the language of section 9(b) clearly exempts internal affairs reports from public disclosure.

People Express Airlines, Inc. v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

100 N.J. 246 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 26, 1985

Penn Central Corp., 87 N.J. 437 (1981) (railroad immunity act’s imputation of contributory negligence to minor injured while playing on railroad did not constitute absolute bar to recovery but was to be construed as a common … The traditional test of negligence is what a reasonably prudent person would foresee and do in the circumstances; duty is clearly defined by knowledge of the risk of harm or the reasonable apprehension of that risk.

State v. Damon Williams

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 19, 2021

So, that is clearly -- The Court: Is that what was on there? Prosecutor: No. .... … To establish theft, on the other hand, the State need establish only that defendant exercised unlawful control over the movable property of another -- the bank’s money. N.J.S.A. 2C:20-3.

State v. Phelps

96 N.J. 500 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 25, 1984

Three distinct conditions must be met for statements to qualify for admissibility under the Rule. First, the statement *510 must have been made in furtherance of the conspiracy. State v. Rios, 17 N.J. 572, 596 (1955). … In addition, the pattern of incoming telephone calls to Gerrizzo’s apartment and the discussions between DeMarco and Gerrizzo clearly established that a gambling conspiracy was being operated at all times during the conversations

Anthony v. Fritts

45 N.J.L. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1883

Eyre, 9 Cl. & Fin. 1, 45, Lord Cottenham very clearly declares the grounds on which courts, of equity, in matters of this nature, base their action. … His statement is this: “ But although all the grantors were principals as between them and the grantees, yet as between themselves some of them might be sureties for others; and if it was established that such was the case

State v. Sims

65 N.J. 359 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 16, 1974

In granting a new trial on this basis-the trial judge was clearly in error. … The record of the trial, once considered immune from collateral attack, Riddle v. Dyche, 262 U. S. 333, 336 , 43 S. Ct. 555 , 67 L.

State v. Judge of the Circuit Court

50 N.J.L. 585 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1888

The enactment clearly and expressly prohibited the sale of liquors, and that purpose was not manifest in the title. Mr. Justice Dixon, in State v. … Society, 4 Zab. 385, 395, this distinction is clearly presented by Chief Justice Green.

TOLL BROS, INC. v. Tp. of West Windsor

173 N.J. 502 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 1, 2002

However, the rale recognizes the problems low income households have in qualifying for mortgages, raising a downpayment and paying for closing costs. … The requirements imposed by the court clearly should include low-income housing units affordable to households with incomes below forty percent of median income.

Kean Fed'n of Teachers v. Morell

233 N.J. 566 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 21, 2018

N.J.S.A. 10:4-12(b) clearly permits the public body to determine to enter into closed session for any one of the identified circumstances approved by the Legislature. … We cannot rewrite a clearly written statute to achieve that for plaintiffs. See DiProspero , 183 N.J. at 492 , 874 A.2d 1039 .

In Re: Petition for Referendum to Repeal Ordinance 2354-12 of the Tp. of West Orange(073069)

223 N.J. 589 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 21, 2015

particular, plaintiffs claimed that the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law 5 did not exempt this bond ordinance from a referendum and that the petition contained a sufficient number of qualifying … We begin by noting that West Orange Ordinance 2354-12 clearly provides for the issuance of redevelopment bonds pursuant to the Local Redevelopment and Housing Law and related Local Bond Law.

Evens v. Griscom

42 N.J.L. 579 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1880

B. 181, all rest upon peculiar circumstances, and are therefore not qualified to be exemplifications of any general principle. I cannot rsee that either of them is anywise in point. The case of Drew v. … I think these cases were correctly decided, and that the foundation on which they rest is thoroughly established.

State v. RB

183 N.J. 308 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 23, 2005

s identification does not qualify as a "fresh complaint." … s mother is harmless error as it is not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. That said, State v. J.Q. reminds us that this is clearly hazardous ground.

State v. Harris

181 N.J. 391 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 19, 2004

From any objective standpoint, the trial transcript reveals that defense counsel clearly achieved that goal. … That would be clearly improper, clearly open up the time frame from birth until present. *492 Call explained that Harris had a right to present evidence that "would make it more likely that [jurors] would extend mercy to

Serrano v. Serrano

183 N.J. 508 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 14, 2005

We recognized that, generally, the plain language of a clearly written statute is the best indicator of legislative intent. Id. at 492 , 874 A.2d at 1048 . … In addition to the new threshold, AICRA created a new, less expensive basic insurance policy, a new dispute resolution procedure, and established an Insurance Fraud Prosecutor.

State v. Apprendi

159 N.J. 7 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 24, 1999

What I have tried to establish' — and all that I need to establish — is that on the basis of our jurisprudence to date, the answer to the constitutional question is not clear. … It is the Court’s burden, on the other hand, to establish that its constitutional answer shines forth clearly from our cases.

SEA ISLE CITY BD. OF EDUC. v. Kennedy

196 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 21, 2008

The panel viewed the two statutes as operating “in separate spheres,” id. at 106 , 922 A.2d 805 , and concluded that the exemption found in N.J.S.A 18A:12-24(j) comes into operation for those board members who remain qualified … The Legislature also spoke clearly and forcefully in requiring no inconsistent claims as a condition for assuming office as a board member. See N.J.S.A 18A:12-2; N.J.S.A. 18A:12-2.1.

Varnum v. Camp

13 N.J.L. 326 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1833

Kent, while maintaining with his wonted strength, an extension of the rule of international law, which he afterwards in his commentaries admits is inconsistent with the weight of American authority, 2 Com. 330, steadily qualifies … For it is clearly the duty of every state to keep its religion and morals pure, and its institutions entire.” In Edmondstone v.

State v. Butler

32 N.J. 166 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 4, 1960

The alleged meagerness of the corroboration is clearly no ground for reversal in view of the settled law in New Jersey that a jury may convict upon the testimony of an accomplice alone. See State v. … But the weight of the corroborative as well as the other testimony was clearly a factual matter for the jury and the effect of the legal error alleged as to Mrs.

Passaic County Probation Officers' Ass'n v. County of Passaic

73 N.J. 247 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 16, 1977

It was clearly implicit that the process we were there upholding was not in violation of this Court’s exclusive control over rules of administration. See also Pros., Del., Essex Cty. v. Hudson Bd. … Salisbury, supra, was the Court speaking of constitutional intent concerning immunity of court rules from overriding legislation. The subject matter there was rules regulating practice and procedure.

State v. Price

11 N.J.L. 204 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1830

Now the caption is clearly sufficient when, in language equally explicit as the statute, it sets forth that the grand jufors are “ good and lawful men.” … Guernsey, to establish and sustain the arrest of judgment, are, The King v. Turneth, said to be reported in three different reporters, 1 Mod. 26; 2 Keble 583, and 1 Ventr. 60; and The King v. Morris, 2 Sir. 901.