Case law

CARLTON HOCUTT III VS. MINDA SUPPLY COMPANY (L-6537-17, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 7, 2020

Additionally, prong two is clearly established. Hocutt's work at Minda was "essentially that of the special employer" because his assigned tasks were directly related to Minda's dry cleaning warehouse business. … In particular, N.J.S.A. 34:8-72(b) expressly extends statutory immunity from suit to companies that hire or lease workers from employee leasing companies.

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).

State v. Metropolitan Iron and Steel Co.

62 N.J. Super. 412 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 1960

The evidence sufficiently establishes the foundation for a reasonable inference that the Lowe scales were accurate on January 25, 1960. … Clearly implied here is the idea that the weighing must take place before this further driving movement can be ordered.

Dock Watch Hollow Quarry Pit v. Tp. of Warren

142 N.J. Super. 103 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 6, 1976

The judge concluded that the testimony as to the alleged detrimental effects upon the neighboring residents had failed to establish the necessity for such restrictions and that the quarry had carried its burden of establishing … For this reason also, the provisions fail, in my view, to qualify as proper exercise of the police power.

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.

Springdale Park, Inc. v. Andriotis

30 N.J. Super. 257 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 1954

Such questions shall be permitted for the purpose of disclosing whether or not the juror is qualified, impartial and without interest in the result of the action. … At all events, even if we were to assume that the three jurors misled the tenant in its efforts to ascertain their qualifications, the burden falls upon it to establish that it was harmed or prejudiced thereby.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JOHN C. VAN NESS (13-01-0208, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

450 N.J. Super. 470 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 2, 2017

Sarno testified that Harris failed to follow the established anti-theft procedures when defendant made purchases on these two days. … Although not clearly stated, we presume the trial judge expected to hear argument on this motion at the day of sentencing.

Irvington General Hsp. v. Dept. of Health

149 N.J. Super. 461 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 2, 1977

The judiciary clearly has no authority to direct the Governor to remove the Commissioner and members of the Health Care Administration Board whom he has appointed, and has no jurisdiction to remove them directly. N.J. … The Commissioner and members of the Board were immune from suit since all of the actions alleged as the basis for the complaint *470 were discretionary and constituted administrative action or inaction of a judicial nature

In re for Certificate of Public Convenience

134 N.J. Super. 500 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 27, 1975

A. 48:13A-4; to establish franchise areas, N. J. 8. A. 48:13A-5; to issue certificates of public convenience and necessity to persons found qualified, N. J. 8. … Legislature intended that the .Board should apply to this industry the same general standards, practices and procedures applicable to the regulation of other utilities, to the extent practicable and except where the statute clearly

Heller v. Ticknor

86 N.J. Super. 501 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 19, 1965

The Legislature alone may determine the duties and the interrelation of the public posts it establishes or authorizes to be established. … Under the circumstances, the first alternative is clearly preferable.

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.

State v. Walker

385 N.J. Super. 388 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 10, 2006

Defendant has not demonstrated that the admission of this testimony was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. … Detective Franklin was qualified as an expert in the field of narcotics and narcotics distribution.

Cafe Gallery, Inc. v. State

189 N.J. Super. 468 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 25, 1983

Neither does N.J.S.A. 1:6-10 et seq, which establishes procedures for the adoption of special laws. N.J.S.A. 33:1-47 and 47.1, if construed as the defense contends, would conflict with N.J.S.A. 1:6-10 et seq. … Super. 116, 121-122 (App.Div. 1958), the words "legally qualified voters" and "qualified electors" were held to refer to registered voters.

Jorgensen v. Pennsylvania Railroad Co.

38 N.J. Super. 317 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 5, 1955

Defendant claims immunity on the theory of privilege. If any privilege existed, it did not reach the height of an absolute one. Cf. Rainier's Dairies v. Raritan Valley Farms, Inc., 19 N.J. 552 (1955). … But in our view, the circumstances establish a case of qualified privilege, which is said to arise: *344 "* * * where circumstances exist, or are reasonably believed by the defendant to exist, which cast on him the duty of

Community Hosp. Group v. More

365 N.J. Super. 84 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 2003

Plaintiff contends that the reference in these provisions to "one" year is clearly a typographical error. … access to other qualified neurosurgeons within that area.

Resorts International, Inc. v. NJM ASSOCIATES

180 N.J. Super. 459 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 1981

As to the requirement for relevance, clearly the basis upon which such charges are founded qualifies. … Both bear critically on the establishment of facts needed by plaintiffs to establish defendants' malice and lack of good faith.

In Re Crowley

193 N.J. Super. 197 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 26, 1984

To have a property interest in a benefit, a person clearly must have more than an abstract need or desire for it. He must have more than a unilateral expectation of it. … Clearly the Commission's conclusory statement was insufficient to satisfy the requirements that the administrative agency make specific findings.

Gardens v. City of Passaic

130 N.J. Super. 369 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 27, 1974

Cherry Hill Tp., 42 N.J. 454, 464 (1964), plaintiffs bore the burden of establishing its invalidity. … Therefore the court will not determine if the current rents or the rents they are seeking to establish are within the ambit of the ordinance.

City of Bayonne v. Marburger

100 N.J. Super. 87 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 18, 1968

an indebtedness whose annual debt service payments would establish an additional eligibility under the School Building Aid Law. … That act clearly reflected the concept of an annual tax effort by the State and by local school districts.

Hunterdon County Democrat, Inc. v. Recorder Publishing Co.

117 N.J. Super. 552 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 10, 1971

The Review disputes this and contends it is qualified to publish official advertising. … It is true, of course, that the office ought to be more than a nominal one established solely to meet the requirement of the statute.