Case law

Palmentieri v. Atlantic City

231 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 15, 1988

Chapter 2 of the Tort Claims Act sets forth the immunities and liabilities of the public entity. … The establishment of times and places for council meetings; h. The establishment of the council as a committee of the whole and the delegation of any number of its members as an ad hoc committee; i.

Winer v. Winer

241 N.J. Super. 510 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 7, 1990

As the court noted, all of these reasons clearly fell within the concept of good faith as established in Holder. Ibid. … "[T]he burden of establishing the immunity of an asset from equitable distribution rests with the party asserting the immunity...." Weiss v. Weiss, 226 N.J.

Presbyterian Home at Pennington, Inc. v. Borough of Pennington

409 N.J. Super. 166 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 10, 2009

At issue is whether an assisted living facility must provide charity care in order to qualify for the exemption. … It contends that, in determining otherwise, the judge misapplied established law to the facts. This argument is without merit.

Victor v. State

401 N.J. Super. 596 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 24, 2008

Stanley Roberts, Inc., 182 N.J. 436, 441 , 867 A. 2d 1133 (2005), bearing in mind that "the trial court's `action[s] should not be disturbed unless it clearly and unequivocally appears there was a manifest denial of justice … Clearly, actions that affect wages, benefits, or result in direct economic harm qualify.

State in Interest of SZ

177 N.J. Super. 32 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 5, 1981

These are clearly the kinds of motions covered by R. 3:10-3 which should not be considered during trial. … Thus since R. 3:10-3 controls, the motions should clearly not have been considered during trial.

Lutz v. Royal Ins. Co. of America

245 N.J. Super. 480 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 23, 1991

The qualified privilege, applicable in this case, has been best described as follows. … However, "[b]ecause a qualified privilege is favored with a presumption that there was no express malice, plaintiff carries the burden of establishing that the statements complained of were made `from an indirect or improper

Hancock v. Board of Review

46 N.J. Super. 418 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 3, 1957

She had established 28 base weeks with the former and 27 base weeks with the latter. … This subsection merely defines a base week and permits an individual to establish a base week with more than one employer so that he may have the statutory required number of weeks in his base year to qualify for benefits

State ex rel. V.A.

420 N.J. Super. 302 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 22, 2011

And if the Court is not, I say if the Court is not allowed to consider these things at a probable cause hearing, then I find that there is clearly a separation of powers issue, [and] that would give total carte blanche to … Trial judges must “be guided exclusively by the factors established by law and not by the judge’s personal code of conduct.” Ibid.

Daniela Simmons v. Kurt Simmons, Jr.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 17, 2025

As detailed above, the court clearly analyzed the statutory factors at some length before reaching its decision. … A party seeking to shield any portion of an asset from equitable distribution bears the burden of establishing its immunity. Pacifico, 190 N.J. at 269.

Russell v. Rutgers Cas. Ins. Co.

234 N.J. Super. 175 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 1989

This circumstance merely suggests that sometimes the effort to establish a principle is costly, particularly if that effort is unsuccessful. … There is no reason why plaintiff should be obliged to bear the cost of Rutgers' efforts to establish its immunity from payment of DRG charges.

Gesner v. Roberts

88 N.J. Super. 278 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 28, 1965

The design of the Congress was clearly to levy a duty `on the estate and not on the particular devises, legacies or distributive shares.' Plunkett v. … The adoption of such a rule does not do violence to the generally established law with respect to the nature of a residuary estate. In Berger v. Burnett, 95 N.J.

In re the Veto by Governor Christie

429 N.J. Super. 277 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 7, 2012

DLPS is one such department “established in the executive branch.” N.J.S.A. 52:17B-1. … VI, sec. 5, para. 4) which largely immunizes it from legislative curbs.”). But, our review is circumscribed, lest we violate the Constitution’s separation of powers. See Texter v.

Gauntt Const. v. RIVER & BAY AUTH.

241 N.J. Super. 310 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 6, 1990

The Commission "was established by the compact as the `joint corporate municipal instrumentality of the States of New Jersey and New York.'" Id. at 345 , 273 A. 2d 10 . … Delaware River Port Auth., 478 Pa. 396 , 387 A. 2d 41 (Pa. 1978) (Pennsylvania's immunity does not extend to this agency).

Southern Jersey Airways v. Nat. Bk. of Secaucus

108 N.J. Super. 369 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 27, 1970

Under N.J.S.A. 2A:44-2 and the Code section quoted, taken together, a qualified aircraft mechanic's lienholder having possession would clearly take priority over a security interest perfected under Article 9 of the Code. … It is notable, moreover, that the plaintiff's interest was represented by an instrument clearly recordable under the federal act.

Capital Health System, Inc. v. Horizon Healthcare

446 N.J. Super. 96 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 2016

Here, Sections 2.7 and 2.8 of the Agreements clearly state that Horizon is permitted to establish new networks, in which the hospitals may participate if they meet "all criteria and standards established and evaluated … Because the disputed information in the McKinsey report is so clearly confidential and, just as clearly, of little or no relevance to the hospitals' claims against Horizon, we conclude the trial judges should have redacted

Keyes Martin & Co. v. Director, Division of Purchase & Property, Department of Treasury

196 N.J. Super. 52 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 5, 1984

An Evaluation Committee found that appellant was the best qualified bidder with a score of 84.2 out of a possible 100 under established technical evaluation criteria, 8 points higher than *56 the next best qualified bidder … That which is clearly implied is as much a part of the law as that which is expressed.’ ” Ward v. Scott, supra, 11 N.J. at 123 , quoting from Brandon v.

Wagner v. Schlue

255 N.J. Super. 391 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 10, 1992

Duty is not a rigid formalism according to the standards of a simpler society, immune to the equally compelling needs of the present order; duty must of necessity adjust to the changing social relations and exigencies and … A review of the authority cited reveals a clear progression in the development of a body of law which establishes a legal liability to others as a result of negligent conduct caused by the use of intoxicating beverages.

Johnson v. Cyklop Strapping Corp.

220 N.J. Super. 250 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 1987

Levine's potential liability as a link in the distributive chain was thus established. … The same is clearly so in respect of a common-law indemnity claim.

Collingswood Hosiery Mills, Inc. v. Am. Fed. Hosiery Workers

28 N.J. Super. 605 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 4, 1953

A party may not be compelled to submit to arbitration questions which, on the face of the contract, are clearly beyond the scope of the arbitration agreement, or as to matters clearly intended to be omitted therefrom. … Div. 1951), relied upon by the defendant, is clearly distinguishable from the instant case.

Scott v. Mayflower Home Imp. Corp.

363 N.J. Super. 145 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 10, 2001

The Holder in due course doctrine will not immunize the financial institutions from the claims of the class members. See also Associates Home Equity Services, Inc. v. … If a consumer in a CFA case establishes the "core issue of liability," then the consumer will be entitled to a presumption of "reliance and/or causation." Id. at 51 , 752 A. 2d at 818 .