Case law

Hebard v. Basking Ridge Fire Company No. 1

164 N.J. Super. 77 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 24, 1978

Township ordinances established the company, along with the Liberty Corners Squad, as the municipal fire department. … In such circumstances, a retroactive remedy is clearly inappropriate.

Frank Lovato v. Clifton Police Department

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 19, 2025

As a result, Sergeant Hayes was "entitled to absolute immunity under [N.J.S.A.] 59:5-2(b) since plaintiff[s] provided no evidence to establish [he] engaged in willful misconduct." … To pierce [N.J.S.A. 59:]3-3's qualified immunity, a plaintiff must prove more than ordinary negligence.

Stubbs v. Security Consumer Discount Co.

146 N.J. Super. 160 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 23, 1976

It has been clearly established in New Jersey that our courts can maintain j uxisdietion over foreign corporations subject only to the constraints of due process. E. g., Avdel Corp. v. Mecure, 58 N. … Clearly, this court is the proper forum for the adjudication of these issues. Returning to the language of Unicon Investments v. Fisco, 137 N. J.

TRUCKING EMP. OF NORTH JERSEY, ETC. v. Vrablick

177 N.J. Super. 142 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 31, 1980

An employee who may not by law be included within a union contract cannot qualify as a beneficiary of a pension plan established for the exclusive benefit of the employees covered by the collective bargaining contract. … The first, that the record fails to establish their ineligibility for participation in the pension plan is clearly without merit and requires no discussion beyond that which we have already said on the subject.

CAROL LEONARD, ETC. VS. CITY OF NEW BRUNSWICK (L-4433-14, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 14, 2017

The TCA qualifies these liability-imposing principals with specific immunities, including those set forth in N.J.S.A. 59:4-8 and N.J.S.A. 59:4-9. … From our review, the record clearly establishes that the Raritan River caused Devine's death, thereby making it the relevant property.

State v. Gilliam

224 N.J. Super. 759 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 17, 1988

On the record defendant has failed to establish either of the final two factors. During the four year interval he never asserted his right to a speedy trial. … The jury also necessarily understood that, whatever William's immunity from prosecution at the time of the trial, he had been subject to prosecution at the time he volunteered his confession; and his trial testimony was in

Grancagnola v. Planning Bd. of Tp. of Borough of Verona

221 N.J. Super. 71 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 2, 1987

It further held that the Board had correctly concluded that Fernicola's proposal qualified as a mixed commercial and residential use and hence was a permitted conditional use. … First, it is clearly hearsay since the affidavit was not submitted by the draftsman himself.

O'Toole v. Forestal

211 N.J. Super. 394 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1986

Clearly, this legislative purpose would be thwarted if tenured teachers in one institution enjoyed reemployment preference rights in all other state and county colleges. … It was clearly established that the teaching staff at RDSM was reduced because of the decreased enrollment and to avoid a sharp tuition increase.

Triffin v. Johnston

359 N.J. Super. 543 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 21, 2003

POINT III THE RECORD, AND THE OFFERED AFFIDAVIT FROM PLAINTIFF'S ASSIGNOR, ESTABLISH THAT PLAINTIFF IS ENTITLED TO JUDGMENT AGAINST THE DEFENDANTS. … municipal immunity for the first time after summation).

CAROLYN L. BABURKA VS. STATE OF NEW JERSEY (L-1266-18, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 10, 2021

HAZLET POLICE OFFICER LOGOTHETIS WAS NOT ENTITLED TO RECEIVE QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. 3. … the course of their public responsibilities, 'insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'"

Belfer v. Borrella

9 N.J. Super. 287 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 25, 1950

The 1938 act ( P.L. 1938, c. 381, p. 955 — R.S. 11:27-13) required that the disabled veteran, in order to qualify for the preference in question, "shall have established proof of such disability on or prior to the date of … The proofs here clearly establish that the defendant failed to comply with the pertinent provision of the 1947 act.

Nusbaum v. Newark Morning Ledger Co.

86 N.J. Super. 132 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 8, 1965

That qualified privilege is clearly applicable here. Coleman v. Newark Morning Ledger Co., 29 N.J. 357, 379 (1959); Swede v. Passaic Daily News, 30 N.J. 320, 333 (1959). … If her public activity on behalf of the teachers extended to 1957 this record does not clearly so demonstrate, for summary judgment purposes. At best, a jury issue in that regard would apparently be projected.

NEW JERSEY CHINESE COMMUNITY CENTER VS. VINCENT DOMINACH (L-0014-17, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 9, 2019

Judge Miller also considered whether if defendant was not entitled to absolute immunity, under the circumstances, he would still be entitled to qualified immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:3-3 ("[a] public employee is not liable … immunity.

State v. Jackson

278 N.J. Super. 69 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 15, 1994

Odom, supra , which disables a fact witness, if otherwise qualified, to testify as an expert. … Defendant's remaining contentions are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). The admission of evidence of prior convictions is a matter of judicial discretion. See State v.

ESTATE OF ANDREW MURNIEKS VS. STATE OF NEW JERSEY (L-6227-14, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 23, 2020

Here the court concludes that . . . defendants' actions were objectively reasonable and therefore qualify for immunity under the statute. II. … "Rather, the trial court must state clearly its factual findings and correlate them with the relevant legal conclusions" as required by the Rule.

DD v. New Jersey Div. of Developmental Disabilities

351 N.J. Super. 308 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 31, 2002

s cortical dendritic synapses were destroyed, she was not qualified to testify as a neurologist or to render strictly neurological opinions. … We, therefore, do not reach the merits of the second contention, i.e., that the uncontroverted evidence clearly establishes his eligibility for the Division's services. A step-by-step analysis is required.

JOHN E. SUSKO VS. BOROUGH OF BELMAR (L-1427-15, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 22, 2019

[P]lacement of a comma after "laws of this State" and before the word "or" divides the clause into two separate, independent phrases that do not act to modify nor qualify one another. … Clearly, defendants' contrary interpretation renders the terms "deprive" and "interfere" indistinguishable, yet they are clearly different in meaning.

State v. Marsh

290 N.J. Super. 663 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 30, 1996

On the municipal court level, plea agreements are permitted, subject to Guidelines established by the Supreme Court. R. 7:4-8(a). … The promise clearly violated Guideline 4, and undermined its purpose of preserving public confidence that a meritorious DWI offense will not be bargained away.

Junghi Kim v. Loyola Jesuit Center, Loyola House of Retreats

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 16, 2024

The court considered defendant's organizational documents and found defendant qualified for immunity under the Act because it was "a nonprofit, religious organization" as defined by the Act, and plaintiff was a beneficiary … that the Legislature clearly made available to the [defendant].").

Schlichtman v. NJ Highway Auth.

243 N.J. Super. 464 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 10, 1990

Concededly, justice is not qualified by the monetary importance or insignificance of the controversial issue. That quote is from Series Publishers, Inc. v. Greene, 9 N.J. … Hanover Township, 58 N.J. 410, 414 , 278 A. 2d 200 (1971) (relating to interspousal immunity in a tort action).