Case law

Brody v. City of Millville

114 N.J. Super. 94 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 3, 1971

As part of the war effort the Federal Government established within the corporate limits of Millville a military airport as a staging area for military aircraft. … Justice Haneman said that "(t)he test to be applied to a *100 land use in order to ascertain whether it qualifies for an immunity from local zoning regulations is whether it is reasonably accessorial or incidental to the

State v. Brown

325 N.J. Super. 447 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 10, 1999

While that establishes that defendant was armed, State v. Merritt, 247 N.J.Super. 425, 429-30 , 589 A.2d 648 (App. … He concedes that he "clearly qualified for extended term treatment in light of his prior convictions." The pre-sentence report describes him as a "27 year old career criminal ...

Borough of Dumont v. Caruth

123 N.J. Super. 331 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 6, 1973

The Legislature clearly intended to allow the municipalities, through their boards of recreation commissioners, to regulate the “use” of parks as well as conduct while using them. … Such use of the streets and public places has, from ancient times, been a part of the privileges, immunities, rights, and liberties of citizens.

Furey v. County of Ocean

273 N.J. Super. 300 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 20, 1994

Rich opined that the drop-off would have been clearly visible to anybody looking for it, such as someone involved in the construction or maintenance of the road. … We conclude that the evidence presented by the plaintiff did establish a cause of action.

Esposito v. Esposito

158 N.J. Super. 285 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 20, 1978

It is also significant that in answers to interrogatories, defendant admitted ownership of all the stock of the corporation except for two qualifying shares allocated to his wife and father. … We are satisfied that this conclusion is contrary to the weight of the evidence and that it clearly and convincingly appears to be a miscarriage of justice.

Jill Mayer v. Board of Trustees, Etc.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 24, 2024

The records provided establish that [] Mayer has pre-planned her return to public employment by engaging in the judicial nomination process during the months of October, November … Although she clearly planned and took steps towards attaining a judgeship prior to her retirement, those were unilateral actions.

In Re Rawls

197 N.J. Super. 78 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 11, 1984

Therefore, the court [1] , sua sponte, ordered both the special policeman and the security company to show cause why they should not be restrained from such activity without said employee qualifying under the Private Detective … The regulatory provisions of N.J.A.C. 13:55-1.8 precluding a police officer from becoming or acting as a qualifying member, officer, or director of a private detective agency, do not prohibit the officer from becoming or

State v. Phelps

187 N.J. Super. 364 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 6, 1983

Whether or not the conspiracy has been established by sufficient, independent evidence, Glasser v. … This exception is clearly pecuniary in nature.

Borough of Franklin Lakes v. Mutzberg

226 N.J. Super. 46 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 24, 1988

In order for the subject property to qualify for a Farmland Assessment, an applicant must establish the following on or before August 1 of the pre-tax year: ownership of at least five acres of land which had been devoted … The record before the trial judge, and before us, establishes that Mutzberg’s mother qualified as a senior citizen because *59 she was over age 65 when she applied for the deduction and otherwise fulfilled the requirements

Bodnarchuk v. Board of Review

309 N.J. Super. 399 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 1998

The Board's additional determination that plaintiff did not establish the base year pursuant to N.J.S.A. 43:21-19(c)(1) is not relevant to this proceeding. … Plaintiff never contended that he qualified under that provision of the statute.

Bd. of Ed., Passaic v. BD. OF ED. OF WAYNE

120 N.J. Super. 155 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 6, 1972

Peoples Bank and Trust Co. of Westfield, 17 N.J. 67, 74 (1954), summary judgment may be rendered when the pleadings, depositions and admissions on file, together with affidavits submitted on the motion, show clearly that … seq. does not apply to all of the children at the shelter, this court is of the opinion that no part of the educational program conducted at the shelter can fall within the statute merely because some of the pupils would qualify

James F. Walters v. Ymca

437 N.J. Super. 111 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 18, 2014

Applying the Gershon factors, we emphasize "that business establishments in New Jersey have well-established duties of care to patrons that come upon their … As we have already noted, business establishments in New Jersey have well-established duties of care to patrons that come upon their premises.

A.M. VS. MONMOUTH COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AND HEALTH SERVICE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 11, 2021

Nevertheless, if our review of the record shows that the agency's finding is clearly mistaken, the decision is not entitled to judicial deference. … The applicant bears the burden of establishing entitlement to the exemption.

Bosland v. Warnock Dodge, Inc.

396 N.J. Super. 267 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 18, 2007

a potential violation of any clearly established legal right. … Those allegations are therefore sufficient to establish a potential violation of the TCCWNA because a consumer contract that violates a clearly established legal right under the CFA regulations is also a violation of the

State v. Weil

421 N.J. Super. 121 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 5, 2011

It is the defense's position that since she had a bank account with $10,000.00 in it, she certainly would not have qualified for a public defender. … This is not a situation where defendant clearly disputed the documentary evidence and categorically denied being represented by counsel at the 1994 municipal court hearing.

Township of Piscataway v. Concerned Citizens for Chronic Psychiatric Adults

200 N.J. Super. 615 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 2, 1985

Bor. of Farmingdale, 55 N.J. 103, 112 (1969). ... this is clearly a ease involving only legal questions not calling for the exercise of administrative expertise. … When read in its broad sense with an understanding that it encompasses both groups, it is clear that the statute provides different preconditions for qualifying as a specially-excepted facility under the Land Use Act.

Cavanagh v. Morris County Democratic Committee

121 N.J. Super. 430 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 1, 1972

Any special committee established by defendant must be considered a part of tile Democratic Committee. … A. 19:34-52 clearly prohibits such activity. *437 This statute cannot bo given any other meaning. In interpreting statutory words, they are to be given their common usage. Ford Motor Co. v. N. J.

State v. DeLane

207 N.J. Super. 45 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 27, 1986

Such a volunteered statement, not made in response to custodial interrogation, is immune from exclusion under Miranda and its progeny. … Sugar , 100 N.J. at 237 The court, therefore, established "a restrictive formulation of the inevitable discovery exception to the exclusionary rule ...

In Re Adoption of Child by IT and KT

164 N.J. Super. 476 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 14, 1978

As a consequence of this finding, he concluded: Only in the implementation of the clearly stated policy of the Legislature does there lie a real opportunity of inhibiting and suppressing the opprobrious black market in children … The trial judge found that "they qualify financially and culturally, but they do not qualify legally." DYFS submitted a report which paints the *492 T.'

McCANNA v. SILLS

103 N.J. Super. 480 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 8, 1968

However, it would appear that the number of such schools in New Jersey is minimal, and it follows that the number of such children not qualifying for transportation benefits is inconsequential. … an improper legislative intent within the comprehension of the First Amendment would be clearly erroneous.