Case law

In re Ford

126 N.J. 483 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 10, 1992

ORDER FRANK FORD, III of BROWNS MILLS, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1986, having been ordered to show cause why he should not be disbarred or otherwise disciplined based on the report of the Disciplinary Review … Board that recommended a two-year prospective suspension as reciprocal discipline for his misconduct in the Virgin Islands; And respondent having failed to appear on the return date of the Order to Show Cause; And good cause

Communications Workers of America, Local 1087 v. Monmouth County Board of Social Services

96 N.J. 442 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 21, 1984

Although N.J.S.A. 11:2A-1 4 implies that the reach of N.J.S.A. 11:15-6 *455 may extend to suspensions, fines, or demotions for nondisciplinary purposes as well, Heath v. Board of Mgrs. of Jersey City Med. … In Division 540 v.

Lanning v. Hudson County Court of Common Pleas

127 N.J.L. 10 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 17, 1941

Duke Power Co. v. Somerset County Board of Taxation (Court of Errors and Appeals), 125 N. J. L. 431; 15 Atl. Rep. (2d) 460. So, too, N. J. S. A. 2:212-1, *16 et seq. (chapter 200, Pamph. … Public Service Co-ordinaled Transport v. State Board of Tax Appeals, 115 N. J. L. 97; 178 Atl. Rep. 550.

Pennsylvania Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

83 N.J.L. 67 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 1912

We see no, merit in the contention that the order is not within the jurisdiction of the board. *70 The Public Utility law (Pamph. L. 1911, p. 374) vests in the board the following, among other, powers: Section 17 (a). … Co. v. Smith, 173 U. S. 684, and the adjudications following it, have no application to the cases at bar. It will also be seen that the order, viewed in this light, is not affected by tire dictum in Atwater v.

W. T. Grant Co. v. Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission

129 N.J.L. 402 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 27, 1943

S. 43:21-4 (c)) and that the board acted properly under R. S. 43:21-5 (c) (1) in not disqualifying the claimant for benefits. R. … Trenton Street Railway Co. v. Lawlor, 74 N. J. Eq. 828; Serventi v. Cella, 104 N. J. L. 351.

Washington National Insurance v. Board of Review of New Jersey Unemployment Compensation Commission

1 N.J. 545 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 7, 1949

See State Board of Milk Control v. Newark Milk Co., 118 N. J. Eq. 504 (E. & A. 1935). … The judgment of the Board of Review here is so confined.

Board of Health of Asbury Park v. Hayes

79 N.J.L. 151 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 25, 1909

The first point urged is that .the judgment of conviction is not sufficiently definite, and to support this view, Board of Health v. Werner, 50 Atl. … In support of this claim, Board of Health v.

Reid v. Borough of Deal

5 N.J. Misc. 144 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 19, 1927

Uszkay v. Dill, 92 N. J. L. 327. The board is not required to license any sort of a place that an applicant may wish to conduct. … Browne v. Lee, 98 N. J. L. 4; Borough of Secaucus v. Kiesewetter, 83 Id. 227. The rule to show cause will be discharged and the issuing of a writ of mandamus denied.

Hudson Bergen County Retail Liquor Stores Ass'n v. Board of Commissioners

134 N.J.L. 481 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 30, 1946

Brandon v. Montclair, 125 N. J. L. 367. None such appears. … Woolworth & Co. v. Zimmerman, 13 N. J. Mis. R. 505.

AWACS, Inc. T/A Comcast Metrophone v. Clemonton Zoning Board of Adjustment

160 N.J. 21 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 30, 1999

Like New Brunswick Cellular Co. v. … While the Board’s petition for .certification was pending, we issued our decision in Smart SMR of New York, Inc. v. Fair Lawn Board of Adjustment, 152 N.J. 309 , 704 A.2d 1271 (1998).

Mountain Hill, LLC v. Zoning Board of Adjustment of Township of Middletown

197 N.J. 475 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 20, 2009

963 A.2d 844 (2009) 197 N.J. 475 MOUNTAIN HILL, L.L.C. v. ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF TOWNSHIP OF MIDDLETOWN. Supreme Court of New Jersey. January 20, 2009. Petition for certification. Denied.

New Jersey Bell Telephone Co. v. State Board of Taxes & Assessment

105 N.J.L. 641 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 20, 1929

Omnipoint Communications, Inc. v. BOROUGH OF FAIR LAWN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT

201 N.J. 145 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 23, 2009

988 A.2d 565 (2009) 201 N.J. 145 OMNIPOINT COMMUNICATIONS, INC. v. BOROUGH OF FAIR LAWN ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT. C-251 September Term 2009, 64,665 Supreme Court of New Jersey. October 23, 2009.

New Brunswick Cellular Telephone Co. v. Borough of South Plainfield Board of Adjustment

160 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 30, 1999

Fair Lawn Board of Adjustment, 152 N.J. 309, 323 , 704 A.2d 1271 (1998) (quoting Medici v. BPR Co., 107 N.J. 1, 4 , 526 A.2d 109 (1987)); see also William M. … A board’s decision ‘is presumptively valid, and is reversible only if arbitrary, capricious, and unreasonable.’ ” Smart, supra, 152 N.J. at 327 , 704 A.2d 1271 (quoting Sica v.

Hoelzel v. Gavalas

25 N.J. Misc. 191 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 10, 1947

The John Agnew Co. v. Board of Education of Paterson, 83 N. J. Eq. 49; 89 Atl. Rep. 1046 ; affirmed, 83 N. J. Eq. 336; 90 Atl. Rep. 1135 ; Brown v. Home Development Co., 129 N. J. Eq. 172; 18 Atl. Rep. (2d) 742. … See Brown v. Home Development Co., supra; Stout v. Sutphin, 132 N. J. Eq. 583; 29 Atl. Rep. (2d) 724. The allowance of interest is controlled by the circumstances of each case in law as well as in equity. Metler v.

Stephen Meehan v. Peter Antonellis, Dmd(075265)

226 N.J. 216 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 9, 2016

Brown argued the cause for amicus curiae New Jersey Association for Justice (Lomurro, Munson, Comer, Brown and Schottland, attorneys; Mr. Brown, Jonathan H. … Manzano v.

City of Passaic v. Local Finance Board of the Department of Community Affairs

88 N.J. 293 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 3, 1982

This case, like the companion case of Camden v. … Justice Trenchard remarked in Mackey v.

Hess v. Public Service Railway Co.

84 N.J.L. 329 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 24, 1913

The declaration followed so closely the language of the declaration in the Supreme Court case of Kennedy v. … Accepting as correct for present purposes the ruling that the word "invited” in that declaration, without more, set up only a conclusion of law (and this is supported by outside authority, 31 Cyc. 61; Brown v.

New Brunswick Cellular Telephone Co. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

153 N.J. 47 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 25, 1998

Petition for certification is granted and summarily remanded to the Appellate Division to reconsider in light of Smart SMR v. Fair Lawn, 152 N.J. 309 , 704 A.2d 1271 (1998).

Board of National Missions of Presbyterian Church in the United States v. Neeld

9 N.J. 349 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 5, 1952

This appeal is from inheritance tax assessments levied against the Board of National Missions and the Board of Foreign Missions of the Presbyterian Church. … Evening Journal Ass’n. v. State Board, 47 N. J. L. 36 (Sup. Ct. 1885); Storage Co. v. Assessors, 56 N. J. L. 389 (Sup. Ct. 1894).