Case law

State v. Rochester

105 N.J. Super. 529 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 1967

Obviously we are seeking qualified jurors. … That the Negro does not have a fair chance to have fellow Negroes on the jury I think as the Court in Fay said may imply prejudice without having to establish it clearly.

Vega v. Piedilato

294 N.J. Super. 486 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 31, 1996

What is clear, however, is that plaintiffs must establish every element under § 339 in order to prove a prima facie case. Coughlin v. U.S. … As stated, Triano, plaintiffs’ expert, testified that anyone moving from one roof to the other would clearly observe the air/light shaft.

Wolff v. Mercer Medical Center

220 N.J. Super. 360 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 16, 1987

Nevertheless, she is amenable to the establishment of a trust fund in an amount fixed by the court provided the fund is dedicated solely for educational purposes. … However, our statute clearly specifies that the age of the dependents (and therefore beneficiaries' relative periods of dependency) is only one of the factors to be considered.

State v. Gonzalez

186 N.J. Super. 609 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 13, 1982

The affidavits in support of defendant's motion establish that Aladino Gonzalez is a deaf mute of Hispanic origin. … Even if defendant had waived his right to counsel, it is fundamental that the State bears the burden of going forward and establishing a prima facie case of the violation charged.

Ivy Hill Park Apartments v. Sidisin

258 N.J. Super. 19 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1992

Section 15:9B-3 provides: The establishment of rents between a landlord and tenant in all housing spaces shall hereafter be determined by the provisions of this chapter. … Plaintiff’s characterization, in its lease, of its entitlement to damages as “so much additional rent for the succeeding months ... and collectable as such” seemingly qualifies under the ordinance as money demanded for the

Alamo Rent a Car, Inc. v. Galarza

306 N.J. Super. 384 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 8, 1997

An agreement to waive statutory remedies must “be clearly and unmistakably established, and contractual language alleged to constitute a waiver will not be read expansively.” Red Bank Reg'l Educ. … No reading of the Alamo arbitration clause clearly and unmistakably establishes that Galarza waived her right to pursue her LAD claim..

Huszar v. Greate Bay Hotel

375 N.J. Super. 463 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 10, 2005

He claimed that defendants' failure to provide the correct elevator number/designation qualified as an exceptional circumstance under R. 4:24-1(c). Relying on the four-factor test articulated in Vitti v. … Clearly, the closing and timing mechanisms of elevator doors are complex instrumentalities requiring plaintiff to present expert testimony to establish a defective mechanism or negligence in the maintenance of the mechanism

Original R. & R. Pickle Works v. G. ARRIGONI & C.

28 N.J. Super. 405 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 13, 1953

The crops were not all destroyed; the record here establishes very substantial shipments of those crops. … We do not conceive that the federal laws were designed to grant debtors such an immunity from their creditors. There is very little law on the matter.

Sharrock v. Keansburg

15 N.J. Super. 11 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 9, 1951

Sample ballots were prepared and mailed to the qualified voters by the district boards of elections on October 31, 1950, and on November 1, 1950. … We conclude that the well established rule so expressed is applicable to the factual characteristics of the present case.

BURL. CTY. COL. FAC. ASSN. v. Bd. of Trustees

119 N.J. Super. 276 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 23, 1972

One of these calendars was passed upon by a defendant witness, a qualified educator, who felt it was a favorable type of calendar. … Similarly, there appears no logical reason to eliminate qualified faculty members from that discussion.

Joan Mernick and John Mernick v. Wanda McCutchen and Hudson

442 N.J. Super. 196 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 3, 2015

We next consider the well-established legal principles that inform our analysis. … The surveillance video in the present case clearly falls within this category of material prepared for litigation.

T.S., K.H., and E.J.T., ETC. v. NEW JERSEY STATE POLICE (L-3037-15, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 20, 2022

POINT X TRIAL COURT IMPROPERLY GRANTED QUALIFIED IMMUNITY BY SIMPLY STATING, "THEREFORE, AS PROBABLE CAUSE DID EXIST IN THIS CASE, QUALIFIED IMMUNITY IS … discretionary functions generally . . . from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.'"

State v. Smith

142 N.J. Super. 575 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 1976

It must also appear that the examiner is qualified and the test administered in accordance with established polygraph techniques. [ 62 N.J. at 46 ] *578 In the matter before us the document with which we are concerned, denominated … Such a state of affairs clearly contravenes McDavitt and its insistence that the stipulation be "clear, unequivocal and complete."

In Re Estate of Posey

89 N.J. Super. 293 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 8, 1965

Copeland qualified as executrix. … A gift to take effect at death must comply with the statutory requirements for wills which were clearly not complied with here.

In Re Guardianship of JO

327 N.J. Super. 304 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 14, 2000

The Act *346 also establishes substantive standards "exceeding those provided for non-Indian parents under state law." … We stress that the Family Part judge did not require a conclusive showing that the children qualified as Indians under the Act.

M. v. S.

169 N.J. Super. 209 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 6, 1979

Div. 1975), held that the county welfare board was entitled to budgetary immunity to such expenses in the absence of specific appropriation for such tests. … Clearly there is a nexus between the parties and the county welfare board.

In re the Suspension or Revocation of the License of Fichner

282 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 1995

Three of the seven Board members were not statutorily qualified to hold office. … He contended on appeal that the statutory provisions establishing the method of selecting dental board members violated various provisions of the Pennsylvania state constitution. Ibid.

Pilat v. Broach Systems, Inc.

108 N.J. Super. 88 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 9, 1969

The court said: Nor should the charge that the petitioner is not acting in good faith, and that he is really seeking for information which he may use to the detriment of this company, and to establish another, which shall … In such case, if the *96 purpose be clearly established, the court would not lend its aid to its accomplishment.

Sumner v. UNSATISFIED CLAIM

288 N.J. Super. 384 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 15, 1996

The claimant must be one intended to be protected and he *387 must clearly demonstrate that he belongs to a class for whose benefit the Fund was established." Id. at 398 , 294 A. 2d 272 . … Super. at 180 , 666 A. 2d 619 (holding that the tort threshold requirement N.J.S.A. 39:6-70(n) is not applicable if the injury to a qualified claimant is caused by a hit and run motorist).

J.W. v. L.R.

325 N.J. Super. 543 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 13, 1999

Based upon that advice, defendant’s attorney moved for summary judgment, urging that no causation could be established absent expert testimony. … He also relied upon the legislative policy established by N.J.S.A. 2A:61B-1.* 2 Plaintiffs opposing certification stated, in pertinent part: 2.