Case law

State v. Popovich

405 N.J. Super. 324 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 17, 2009

"This includes full proof that the equipment was in proper order, the operator qualified and the test given correctly." Ibid. (citation omitted). In our judgment, State v. … By its use of the preposition "at," the rule clearly envisions an expert observing trial proceedings and then commenting upon what he has heard.

State v. DePiano

150 N.J. Super. 309 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 10, 1977

In my view, no ordinary person, whether judge or juror, is qualified to make the difficult judgments which these cases require. … Although not apparent to most, to the viewer whose perceptions have been cultivated these values are clearly present.

NM v. Division of Medical Assistance and Health Services

405 N.J. Super. 353 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 26, 2009

The Medicaid Program established by Title XIX of the Social Security Act (the "Act"), 42 U.S.C.A. § 1396 to § 1396w-1, is a joint federal-state program designed to provide medical assistance to individuals "whose income and … decisions are supposed to extend to the CMS's interpretation of the federal statutes governing Medicaid, the CMS's interpretation should be followed unless an adversely affected party can show that this interpretation is clearly

State v. Soto

324 N.J. Super. 66 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 1996

Kadane, an eminently qualified statistician. Among his many credentials, Dr. … Thereon he clearly said that he did not want targeting or discriminatory enforcement and that "[w]hen you put on this uniform, you leave your biases and your prejudices behind."

Musico v. Musico

426 N.J. Super. 276 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 11, 2012

The court rejected the plaintiff-father's position that the parties' prior agreement essentially immunized him from having to pay increased, guideline-level support. … Clearly, neither of these events would justify reducing defendant's child support obligation.

Paff v. Director, Office of Attorney Ethics

399 N.J. Super. 632 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 28, 2007

The words, “except upon order to the Supreme Court”, established a need for an applicant to establish certain criteria to permit disclosure. Ibid, (quoting S.D. Codified Laws § 16-19-66 ). … Clearly, documents prepared by OAE, as well as documents collected by or received by OAE from outside sources, in the possession of a public agency, qualify as common law records.

H. v. H.

59 N.J. Super. 227 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 1959

If the rule in adultery cases is applicable by analogy, inclination, opportunity, and, indeed, indulgence are clearly established. Corroboration, by circumstances and tacit admission, is amply made out. … We conclude that the required harmful effect of defendant’s behavior has been sufficiently established.

Smith v. Smith

17 N.J. Super. 128 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 1951

after counsel for the plaintiff had announced the conclusion of his introduction of the evidence, rested his affirmative branch of the case, and after the hearing of the arguments on the motion to dismiss, that a somewhat qualified … In the matter sub judice the denial of the belated application was clearly within the bounds of sound discretion. The circumstances may be summarized.

State v. E.R.

273 N.J. Super. 262 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 11, 1994

Defendant’s prior heroin addiction, his prior *270 criminal convictions, his present plea of guilty to possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, clearly justified the court’s conclusion that aggravating factors (6) … Although the State’s concern is legitimate, the standards established for a prisoner’s release due to his medical condition on an application under R. 3:21 — 10(b)(2) are very precise. See State v.

State v. Maas & Waldstein Co.

83 N.J. Super. 211 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 3, 1964

In such circumstances, the defense of sovereign immunity would not be available to plaintiff. Indeed, the doctrine of sovereign immunity is currently in disfavor. See McCabe v. N.J. … These drawings clearly show that the federal consent extended beyond the very limited area of the railroad bridge to which defendant refers.

Dabal v. Sodora

260 N.J. Super. 397 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 28, 1992

. *401 Clearly, both criteria must be addressed. As the Supreme Court explained in Oswin: We understand that one might view the "serious impact on plaintiff's life" test as somewhat subjective. … There is nothing in this motion record by which the defense attempts to contradict plaintiff's assertion that her objectively established injuries have had the serious impact she asserts on the way she lives.

Tractenberg v. Township of West Orange

416 N.J. Super. 354 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 16, 2010

The mere fact that the completed appraisals were addressed to the Township attorney did not establish an attorney-client relationship. … Here, it cannot be said that the competitive advantage exemption clearly applies to these facts.

Chemical New Jersey Holdings, Inc. v. Director, New Jersey Division of Taxation

22 N.J. Tax 606 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 2004

PLAINTIFF HAS MADE A PRIMA FACIE SHOWING THAT IT QUALIFIES AS A FINANCIAL BUSINESS CORPORATION. … Despite plaintiffs suggestion that its choice of filing status was merely a ministerial task, the decision was clearly of significant business importance.

Schorpp-Replogle v. Mfrs. Ins. Co.

395 N.J. Super. 277 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 30, 2007

Nevertheless, we recognize that our brief reference to tinnitus in Ventre did not clearly establish its potential compensability as a matter of law. Thus, the appeal before us is essentially one of first impression. … Tinnitus clearly does not satisfy these definitions as an occupational hearing loss.

Crowell v. Transamerica Delaval Inc.

206 N.J. Super. 298 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 17, 1984

Super. 153 (App.Div. 1982), the court, citing Pierce , said: "The task of a court is to distinguish between public policy and the employee's own values; the latter would not entitle the employee to immunity from discharge … "Judicial decisions" have established the equitable estoppel rule in a long parade of cases. For example, in N.J. Suburban Water Co. v.

DEPT. OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION v. Kafil

395 N.J. Super. 597 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 15, 2007

In reconsidering the matter, the trial court adhered to its initial conclusion, but qualified the reasoning to opine that the statutory provisions at issue "prohibit[ed DEP] from seeking a court ordered injunction for remediation … Unquestionably, this option is available to DEP, but the existence of such an alternative cannot be seen to bar DEP from availing itself, at its reasonable election, of another remedy clearly established in N.J.S.A. 58:10

Groh v. Groh

288 N.J. Super. 321 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 29, 1995

The parties do not dispute that plaintiff's pension is a qualified plan under ERISA. … ERISA clearly supersedes state law involving distribution of Henry's death benefits.

State v. R.E.B.

385 N.J. Super. 72 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 2006

In this case, we first question whether Guenther established a “new rule.” … Defense counsel countered, however, that he “heard fairly loud and clearly [the judge’s] voice indicating that the boy couldn’t be any more heartbroken. I heard that very clearly and I don’t hear the best.”

Fiola v. NJ Treas. Dept.

193 N.J. Super. 340 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 9, 1984

IF YOU CAN QUALIFY FOR A RETIREMENT BENEFIT, NOTIFY US IMMEDIATELY THAT YOU WISH TO APPLY FOR A SPECIFIC RETIREMENT BENEFIT, SINCE YOUR FAILURE TO NOTIFY OUR OFFICE WILL JEOPARDIZE YOUR ELIGIBILITY FOR BENEFITS. … The statutory provision in question, N.J.S.A. 43:16A-11.2, not heretofore construed in a reported decision, provides in pertinent part as follows: Should a member, after having established 10 years of creditable service,

Ponter v. Ponter

135 N.J. Super. 50 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 9, 1975

These cases establish a new era in women's continuing struggle for the establishment of their individual rights. *53 In Bolton and Wade the Supreme Court dealt with the issue of a woman's right to an abortion. … The court declined to grant relief, finding that a married woman had a right to her health and such right could not be qualified by the requirement of spousal consent.