Case law

Messenger v. Pennsylvania Railroad

37 N.J.L. 531 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1874

The solution of the question must, then, depend upon the nature of the employment and such deductions as follow from the established principles affecting it. … This contract being clearly within it, and odious to the law in the respect on which a recovery is sought, cannot be sustained. But there is an additional ground upon which it is also objectionable.

Houston v. Traphagen

47 N.J.L. 23 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1885

The first ground taken against this verdict is clearly untenable. … But it failed to establish that inference because the case failed to negative other possible causes, and each expert qualified his testimony by reference to his ignorance of the plaintiff’s condition between the injury and

Rogers v. Colt

21 N.J.L. 704 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 1848

There is no other language in the instrument clearly shewing a different intent, by which the natural import of these terms is altered, or their effect qualified. 4. … If so, he clearly erred. The appropriate province of the court and of the jury are totally distinct.

Wingate v. Estate of Ryan

149 N.J. 227 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 19, 1997

The paternity is established by an adjudication before the death of the father or is established thereafter by clear and convincing proof, except that the paternity established under this subsection is ineffective to qualify … To hold otherwise would grant heirship immunity to parents of children *240 who are born out of wedlock and do not establish parentage before reaching age twenty-three.

Long v. Township of Union & The Clinton Hill Cemetery Ass'n

79 N.J.L. 70 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 23, 1909

township of Union, county of Union, on March 18th, 1909, entitled “An ordinance granting the .consent and approval of the township committee of the township of Union *71 to the Clinton Hill Cemetery Association, to locate and establish … The testimony clearly shows that the trolley was to offer facilities for transportation to the inhabitants of this section of the township, irrespective of cemetery uses.

Sisler v. Gannett Co., Inc.

104 N.J. 256 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 21, 1986

Jeffries, 93 N.J. 533 (1983) (parental immunity inapplicable if parent willfully and wantonly failed to supervise child). … It is our conclusion that the plaintiff must establish defamation against defendants by establishing actual malice in the publication of the offending articles.

Wanaque Borough Sewerage Authority v. Township of West Milford

144 N.J. 564 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 26, 1996

Pursuant to the Tucker Act, 28 U.S.C. §§ 1346 , 1491, Congress has waived sovereign immunity with respect to actions under express or implied contracts. … The relationship among the parties to the WVRSA is defined clearly by statute.

Brodsky v. Grinnell Haulers, Inc.

181 N.J. 102 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 10, 2004

The Legislature clearly knew how to impose full responsibility on a defendant joined with an insolvent tortfeasor. … As the Appellate Division correctly noted, “Horsman was not statutorily immune from a negligence suit at the time of the accident----[and] only became immune after he discharged his debt in bankruptcy.”

Patricia J. McClain v. Board of Review (080397)(Statewide)

237 N.J. 445 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 29, 2019

the burden of establishing that she is entitled to UI benefits through an adversarial process. … The employee must satisfy the burden of establishing that she is entitled to UI benefits. Brady, 152 N.J. at 218.

Plainfield-Union Water Co. v. Borough of Mountainside

14 N.J. 296 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 11, 1954

The reinvestiture of jurisdiction in the inferior tribunal is in consonance with that judgment, and qualified accordingly. … establish bias and prejudice” and a “preconceived plan * * * to aid and establish the basis of a predetermined ruling later to be made in favor of the respondent.”

Matter of Estate of Branigan

129 N.J. 324 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 3, 1992

Fund A is a marital deduction trust designed to minimize estate taxes by establishing a Qualified Terminable Interest Property (“QTIP”) trust. … Further, the decedent clearly intended that his sons’ powers of appointment should be limited.

In Re Proposed Increased Intrastate Industrial Sand Rates

66 N.J. 12 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 23, 1974

E. at 774 ] And, of course, Judge Cardozo saw such “constitutional immunities” as inhering in the public which pays as well as in the entity which receives. … But (within constitutional limits of course) this is clearly a matter for the Legislature.

Public Service Electric & Gas Co. v. City of Camden

13 N.J. Misc. 693 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 21, 1935

It clearly appears that five hundred and forty-seven persons whose names appeared upon the petition did not sign the same. The names of seventy-eight were affixed by others; one hundred and fifty-one were non-residents. … It was established that two thousand four hundred and seventy-five were not registered and that one hundred and sixty-seven were not eligible for one reason or another.

Spencer v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

66 N.J.L. 301 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 17, 1901

I think clearly not. The northerly abutments would be on private property, subject to interference or removal by the owner. To so hold would be in conflict with the principles laid down in the authorities above cited. … In this state the principle has been established by repeated decisions, notably in Livermore v.

State v. Townsend

186 N.J. 473 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 15, 2006

Kabus was qualified to offer the proffered testimony. Indeed, Dr. Kabus was previously qualified to testify as an expert about battered woman’s syndrome in State v. … We may reverse on the basis of unchallenged error if we find error that was “clearly capable of producing an unjust result,” R. 2:10-2, commonly known as the “plain error” standard.

Flanagan v. Department of Civil Service

29 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 19, 1959

[They are] vested with a high discretion, and its abuse must appear very clearly before the courts will interfere.” Maxwell v. Civil Service Commission, 169 Cal. 336 , 146 P. 869 (Sup. Ct. 1915). … John Enright argues as a personal charge of error that he is qualified and should be allowed to take the examination.

Schmalz v. Wooley

43 L.R.A. 86 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 14, 1898

They clearly indicate that the subject of legislation is trade-marks and labels and that the purpose is to protect them. … This connection is as clearly one for business purposes as is that of members in a partnership or of stockholders in a corporation.

In Re Opinion No. 24

128 N.J. 114 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 14, 1992

All the independent *118 paralegals testifying before the Committee were well qualified. … Without supervision, the work of the paralegal clearly constitutes the unauthorized practice of law.

Port of New York Authority v. Hackensack Water Co.

41 N.J. 90 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 6, 1963

The distinction has proved useful to restrain the ancient concept of municipal tort immunity, not because of any logic in the distinction, but rather because sound policy dictated that governmental immunity should not envelop … This stimulated state legislation to relieve private utilities of the common law rule, at least as to projects qualifying for *108 federal aid.

Abbott v. Burke

100 N.J. 269 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 23, 1985

Establishment of educational goals at both the State and local levels; b. Encouragement of public involvement in the establishment of educational goals; c. … These and other “output” measures of educational success clearly bear on plaintiffs’ constitutional claim.