Case law

Loftus v. Fraz

43 N.J.L. 667 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1881

It is an established principle, absolutely necessary to the proper discharge of the judicial functions, that no action will lie against a judge acting in a judicial capacity, for any errors which he may commit, in a matter … That was the evidence of his adjudication. *670 When the affidavit was presented to him it was clearly his judicial duty, made so by the statute, to decide whether the facts therein stated authorized the issuing of a warrant

Reid v. Gorsuch

67 N.J.L. 396 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 24, 1902

system of government the most familiar example •of “election” is that which is participated in by the people at large; at the same time it requires the use of the phrase “popular election,” or “election by the people,” to clearly … That these distinctions, and the uses of the terms “elect” and “appoint,” are well established in our fundamental and statute laws can readily be demonstrated.

State v. Fay

127 N.J.L. 77 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 25, 1941

The challenged conversation with Haussling, in our opinion, was clearly admissible. … Rep. 724 ), fairly, accurately and clearly states the applicable law. It is free from reversible error. 3.

In Re Incorporation of Village of Loch Arbour

25 N.J. 258 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 4, 1957

The constitutional validity of the classification established by N. J. 8. A. 40 .T57-1 et seq. … As a constitutionally recognized scheme of government, that form seems clearly appropriate for the specified population unit when localized as described.

State v. DeGeralmo

83 N.J.L. 135 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 1912

room, it being shown that he'was a garbage collector, and upon a comparison of finger marks found upon one of the posts of a portico, by which the guilty person ascended from the ground to the window of her room, a duly qualified … Tf this was true then he has established an alibi.

Colacurcio Contracting Corp. v. Weiss

20 N.J. 258 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 12, 1955

The right to trial by jury secured by the Constitution does not immunize a jury verdict from nullification in any case where it clearly and convincingly appears that the verdict was the result of mistake, partiality, prejudice … At the time of the adoption of our first Constitution the motion was the established common-law procedural device for relief against the verdict, addressed, however, not to the trial judge, but to the trial court en banc.

Borough of Glassboro v. Vallorosi

117 N.J. 421 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 30, 1990

We concluded that the State’s proposed use of the premises was reasonable and thus immune from regulation by the local zoning ordinance. Id. at 220 . … Clearly, their living arrangements would not be the functional equivalent of a family unit.

Egan v. Erie Railroad

29 N.J. 243 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 2, 1959

J. 1 (1958); Note, “Landowners’ Liability in New Jersey: The Limitation of Traditional Immunities,” 12 Rutgers L. Rev. 599 (1958). … “To establish a willful or wanton injury it is necessary to show that one with knowledge of existing conditions, and conscious from such knowledge that injury will likely or probably result from his *255 conduct, and with

Lavino v. Lavino

23 N.J. 635 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 25, 1957

In order to succeed in establishing an inchoate right of dower in the property, the plaintiff attacks the constitutionality of N. J. … Hampton Holding Co., supra, it is not immune from a legislative bar. The judgment is affirmed. For affirmance — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Heher, Oliphant, Burling, Jacobs and Weintraub — 6.

Charlotte Robinson v. Frank Vivirito (072407)

217 N.J. 199 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 26, 2014

The TCA reestablished the immunity of public entities, while also creating a scheme to impose liability on public entities to ameliorate “the harsh results of the [sovereign immunity] doctrine.” Beauchamp v. … Div. 1985), certif. denied, 103 N.J. 473 (1986), which recognized a standard of care to provide safe passage for commercial establishments which provided off-site parking to patrons. Ross, supra, 221 N.J.

State v. McLean

205 N.J. 438 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 31, 2011

And so by the use of the binoculars, were you able to see what was happening clearly? … First, the police officer in *462 this matter was not qualified to testify as an expert.

Township of Mahwah v. Bergen County Board of Taxation

98 N.J. 268 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 14, 1985

S.A. 30:9-24 allows counties of the first class to establish maternity hospitals, issue bonds, and tax for the payment of those bonds; N.J. … to ever qualify for the rebate.

Abbamont v. Piscataway Township Board of Education

138 N.J. 405 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 22, 1994

According to plaintiff, MeGarigle discovered at that meeting that the inspector had not been qualified to check air quality. … Moreover, the failure of the Legislature to include in CEPA an immunity from punitive damages or to refer to TCA is significant.

State v. Alexander

7 N.J. 585 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 24, 1951

They do not confer any further rights, privileges or immunities upon the individual but are designed to safeguard those rights by making the violation of them a criminal offense. … When a jury in a murder case retires to its deliberations under instructions that it can return a verdict of either first- or second-degree murder, it must be clearly instructed that the intent to kill is not by itself sufficient

State v. Collectors of East

26 N.J.L. 519 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1857

The difficulty in the application of this privilege t.0 the corporate immunities of the plaintiffs, as land-holders, arises from a difference of opinion as to the scope of the exemption ; whether it extends to every species … The case before us comes directly within the principle established in that case.

State v. McCrary

97 N.J. 132 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 26, 1984

If, under these latter circumstances, the guilty verdict had been returned by a non-death-qualified jury, then the sentencing phase would have to go forward with a newly-impanelled, death-qualified jury. … We are clearly of the opinion, that in this state, at least, it does not.

Carbone v. Warburton

11 N.J. 418 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 9, 1953

It may equally be established from evidence of the witness’s observations of the things done by fellow practitioners or of the witness’s reading and study of treatises and medical journals upon the subject. … We think the trial judge was clearly right. The subject of Dr.

Ward v. Zelikovsky

136 N.J. 516 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 20, 1994

At the core of those tests, however, are certain fairly well-established principles. True statements are absolutely protected under the First Amendment. 2 Fowler V. … Meanings of this sort fit comfortably within the immunity for name-calling. [/d at 402.]

Ballinger v. Delaware River Port Authority

172 N.J. 586 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 25, 2002

Therefore, beyond being simply a compensatory measure affecting only government action, “CEPA establishes a statutory exception to the general rule that an employer may terminate an at-will employee with or without cause. … Both creator states in this case clearly regard the fundamental duty of a police officer to be enforcement of the laws.

Pennsylvania Coal Co. v. Township of Saddle River

96 N.J.L. 40 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 1, 1921

Chief Justice Chase in the Thomson case: “We perceive no limits to the principle of exemption which the complainants seek to establish.” … To us it is inconceivable that congress ever intended any such drastic and all-pervading immunity from taxation.