Case law

Consumers' Research, Inc. v. Evans

132 N.J.L. 431 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 4, 1945

Maisonet v. New Jersey Department of Human Services, Division of Family Development

140 N.J. 214 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 23, 1995

Felder v. Casey, 487 U.S. 131, 138 , 108 S.Ct. 2302, 2306 , 101 L.Ed.2d 123, 137 (1988). The rationale for the rule is that the federal courts are always available to hear federal claims. Brown v. … The Appellate Division found that Anastasio v. Planning Board of West Orange, 209 N.J.Super 499, 518, 507 A.2d 1194 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 107 N.J. 46 , 526 A.2d 136 (1986), is to be distinguished on the facts.

State v. Bermann

134 N.J.L. 607 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 12, 1946

Feeney v. Burke

89 N.J.L. 359 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 19, 1916

Hand v. Mayor of Wildwood

8 N.J. Misc. 498 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 26, 1930

Certainly it has not been open to doubt since Crane v. Jersey City, 90 N. J. L. 109, and Foley v. Orange, 91 Id. 554. … Respondent urges that if there is any proof to sustain the finding this court will not disturb it; citing Ayers v. Newark, 49 N. J. L. 170; Ackerly v. Jersey City, 54 Id. 310; Cavanagh v.

State v. Mayor of Jersey City

29 N.J.L. 441 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1861

For affirmance — The Chancellor, the Chief Justice, and Judges Brown, Clawson, Ogden, Vredenburgh, Combs, Cornelison, Kennedy and Swain. For reversal — Judge Wood. Cited in State v. … Jersey City, 1 Vr. 150; Jersey City v. State, 1 Vr. 525 ; Eames v. Stiles, 2 Vr. 493 ; State v. City of Hudson, 3 Vr. 368 ; State v. Jersey City, 5 Vr. 44 ; State v. Atlantic City, 5 Vr. 103 ; State v.

Gural v. Engle

128 N.J.L. 252 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 20, 1942

Magowan v. Baird, 53 N. J. Eq. 656; Fitzsimmons v. Board of Education of Carteret, 125 N. J. L. 15. This statute does not so provide. … .; United States v. Linn, 40 U. S. 290 ; 10 L. Ed. 742 ; Commonwealth v. Perry, 330 Pa. 355 ; Mahoney v. United States Shipping Board E. F. Corp., 253 Mass. 234 ; 148 N. E. Rep. 454.

Ayres v. Tinsman

74 N.J.L. 295 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 25, 1907

Muchmore v. Dodd, 24 Vroom 369 . But the bill of sale was not executed in such manner as to be valid against a creditor of the mortgagor. … Woodside v. Adams, 11 Vroom 417 . The rule to show cause is discharged.

Bower v. Bd. of Educ. of East Orange

149 N.J. 416 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 10, 1997

N.J.S.A. 18A:6-9; see Dore v. Board of Educ., 185 N.J.Super. 447, 452 , 449 A.2d 547 (App.Div.1982)). … Thus, in Titus v.

Nat. House Farms Ass'n, Inc. v. Bd. Adjustment, Oakland

2 N.J. 11 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 4, 1949

Potts v. Board of Adjustment of Borough of Princeton, 133 N. J. L. 230 (Sup. Ct. 1945). The second fundamental weakness of respondent’s position is that no unnecessary hardship to respondent was proven. … As a jurisdictional prerequisite to alleviating action by the Board of Adjustment there must be proven unnecessary hardship to the individual landowner. Brandon v. Board of Commissioners of Town of Montclair, 124 N. J.

State v. JG

201 N.J. 369 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 7, 2010

See Klagsbrun v. … See also People v.

Robinson v. Coia

183 N.J. 25 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 29, 2005

See Agency Rent-A-Car v. Indemnity Ins. … Co. v. Continental Cas. Co., 28 N.J. 554, 563 , 147 A.2d 529 (1959).

Faas v. Zink

25 N.J. 500 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 20, 1958

We are told the Parole Board by some general method of communication informed prisoners so situated of their choice, pointing out the relative benefits of aggregation. … The Board apparently assumed appellant consented to aggregation and hence did not consider him for parole in 1952, when he would first have been eligible for consideration on a consecutive basis.

Howard v. Mayor and Bd. of Finance of City of Paterson

6 N.J. 373 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 19, 1951

The board of health is, admittedly, one of the governing bodies referred to in these statutes as it is so defined in R-. S. 40:42 — 2. In Davaillon v. Elizabeth, 121 N. J. L. 380 (Sup. … .” *378 Similarly, in Heil v. Wildwood, 11 N. J. Misc. 171 (Sup.

State v. Welch

46 N.J. 57 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 22, 1965

Smart v. Pate, 318 P. 2d 559 (7 Cir. 1963); State v. Long, 235 Md. 125 , 200 A. 2d 641 (Ct. App. 1964); People v. McKee, 25 Ill. 2d 553 , 185 N. E. 2d 682 (Sup. Ct. 1962); Brown v. … See also, Lane v. Brown, 372 U. S. 477 , 83 S. Ct. 768 , 9 L. Ed. 2d 892 (1963).

W. J. Donnell Lumber Co. v. Connor

9 N.J. Misc. 869 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 1, 1931

Crane v. Brighton Mills, 98 N. J. L. 308.

Consumers' Research, Inc. v. Evans

128 N.J.L. 95 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 13, 1942

This writ of certiorari brings before us for review the determination of the Board of Review of the Unemployment Compensation Commission holding that an employee of Consumers’ Research, Inc., prosecutor, Alice B. … Compare Shore Fishery, Inc., v. Board of Review of New Jersey Unemployment Compensation Commission et al., 127 N. J. L. 87. The judgment under review will be affirmed and the writ dismissed, with costs.

Carpet Remnant Warehouse, Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Labor

125 N.J. 567 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 6, 1991

Department of Employment v. Brown Bros. Constr., 100 Idaho 479 , 600 P.2d 783 (1979) (loggers held to be free from control and engaged in independent business and therefore independent contractors); North Am. … See Worsnop v. Board of Review, 92 N.J.Super. 260, 265 , 223 A. 2d 38 (App.Div.1966).

Roman Catholic Diocese of Newark v. Ho-Ho-Kus Borough

42 N.J. 556 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 24, 1964

A. 18:11-2; and, see Durgin v. Brown, 37 N. J. 189 (1962); Board of Educ. v. Atwood, 73 N. J. L. 315 (Sup. Ct. 1906), affirmed 74 N. J. L. 638 (E. & A. 1907). … Trinity Evangelical Lutheran Church v. Board of Adjustment, supra; Brandeis School v. Village of Lawrence, supra.

Thompson v. Giant Tiger Corp.

118 N.J.L. 10 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 28, 1937

Bader v. Great Atlantic and Pacific Tea Co., 112 N. J. L. 241; Taylor v. Roth & Co., 102 Id. 702; Bodine v. The Georke Co., Ibid. 642. … L. 495; State v. Kane, 77 Id. 244. Trenton Passenger Railway v. Cooper, 60 Id. 219; 37 Atl. Rep. 730 ; Murphy v. George Brown & Co., 91 N. J. L. 412, and other cases. The defendant, on the other hand, cites Blackman v.