Case law

Sacks Realty Co. v. Batch

235 N.J. Super. 269 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 24, 1989

Nevertheless plaintiff has not evinced any ill-will or bad faith towards the tenants which even remotely would qualify as evidence that this action is a reprisal. … First, N.J.S.A. 2A:18-61.13 et seq. clearly and convincingly applies only to tenancies located in Atlantic City.

Spiewak v. Board of Education

180 N.J. Super. 312 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 22, 1981

When she first began to work for the district, Spiewak’s employment was clearly part-time and her responsibilities limited to three hours of instruction a day. … The absence or availability of a special class facility in any district shall not be construed as relieving a board of education of the responsibility for providing education for any child who qualifies under this chapter

Sarris v. AA Pruzick & Co.

37 N.J. Super. 340 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 11, 1955

The one: "The evidence as I see it, now clearly indicates that this defendant company had no control whatsoever over the electrician, who was supplied by it to the plaintiff's employer. … When light is used for construction purposes, a qualified electrician — that is a union agreement — a qualified electrician has to be on the premises to maintain and to furnish — by `furnish' I mean run any wires if necessary

Snyder v. I. Jay Realty Co.

53 N.J. Super. 336 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 1958

It has become a commonplace to state that the traditional immunities of landowners and occupiers are giving way to the imposition of liability where there is a substantial foreseeability of harm to others likely to enter … It is a familiar principle that the burden of establishing the existence of a fact or circumstance is on the party relying thereon. See, e.g., Collins Realty Co. v. Sale, 104 N.J. Eq. 138, 142 ( E. & A. 1928).

Matter of Estate of Schock

226 N.J. Super. 67 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 14, 1988

Wickham established a "marital trust" for his wife, Mary S. Wickham, consisting *69 of 50% of the value of his adjusted gross estate. A sizeable amount was involved. Mrs. … The United Jersey Bank qualified as Executor thereunder. Her estate is valued in excess of $3,600,000. [2] Federal estate taxes will be assessed at a rate of about 53%.

Reyes v. Meadowlands Hosp. Med. Ctr.

355 N.J. Super. 226 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 12, 2001

In Estate of Hussain , Judge Harper wrote: ... to establish precedent for the production of such files would severely prejudice the ability of St. … Furthermore, as noted by Judge Clyne in Bundy , although the Legislature has provided for immunity from civil liability to all persons serving as members of committees responsible for the evaluation and improvement of the

North Jersey Newspaper v. Freeholders

245 N.J. Super. 113 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 28, 1990

There are, to begin with, several categories of calls which are, in our view clearly immune to disclosure, and which would in any event have to be redacted prior to public inspection. [1] First are the personal calls for … Privacy expectations are established by general social norms. State v. Hempele, 120 N.J. 182, 200 , 576 A. 2d 793 (1990).

Vitti v. Brown

358 N.J. Super. 40 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 11, 2003

It was clearly contemplated that discovery would ordinarily be completed *387 within the expanded periods allowed under the new rules. … Barbera, 328 N.J.Super. 424 , 746 A. 2d 68 (App.Div. 2000) (in the context of late filings, attorney carelessness does not qualify as extraordinary circumstances) and Martinelli v.

GP Putnam's Sons v. Calissi

86 N.J. Super. 82 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 7, 1964

Hudson County News Co., 41 N.J. 247 (1963): "* * * the guidelines established initially in Roth and clarified in Manual Enterprises v. … But this position does not recognize the appropriate tests established by the United States Supreme Court.

Webber v. McCormick

63 N.J. Super. 409 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 21, 1960

Plaintiff's testimony concerning the accident and the immediate and obvious injuries she suffered, corroborated by the testimony of the passenger in her car, together with the testimony of her doctor, established the causal … involving issues of fact not determined by a jury, the trial court's determination will not be disturbed unless, having given due regard to the opportunity of the trial judge to pass upon the credibility of the witnesses, it clearly

State v. Ercolano

335 N.J. Super. 236 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 28, 2000

Viewing N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2 as a whole, it is clear that the Legislature intended a forfeiture of public employment upon conviction for a qualifying offense to be mandatory, regardless of whether forfeiture is ordered at the … N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2(b)(2) establishes a procedure for applying to the court for an order of forfeiture if a public employee is convicted in a federal court or a court of another state.

Saint Peter's Univ. Hosp. v. Lacy

372 N.J. Super. 170 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 14, 2004

Peter's argues that the Legislature has clearly expressed its will to retain the CN requirement as to RPCs. … A hospital that newly qualified as a "children's hospital" was exempt from the CN requirement of N.J.S.A. 26:2H-7, but it was nevertheless required to obtain a CN "regarding the establishment of specific health care services

C.R. VS. M.T. (FV-08-0021-19, GLOUCESTER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 13, 2019

This doctrine requires our conclusion that the qualifying phrase applies only to "other substance" and not "intoxicant." … voluntarily – may support a finding that the victim could not consent, we consider the level of intoxication required to support such a finding. 6 It is 4 To be sure, the Legislature could have made this point more clearly

State v. Fuller

231 N.J. Super. 66 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 1989

Hartley established a bright-line test that once a person in custody exercises his Fifth Amendment right to remain silent after having been given his Miranda warnings, his right has not been “scrupulously honored” unless, … At the other extreme, a blanket prohibition against the taking of voluntary statements or a permanent immunity from further interrogation, regardless of the circumstances, would transform the Miranda safeguards into wholly

State v. Dolce

178 N.J. Super. 275 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 3, 1981

Ercolano, 79 N.J. 25 (1979), relied upon by defendant in support of his suppression motion, are clearly distinguishable. … In any event, constitutional limitations on the search of luggage seized with probable cause during a valid warrantless search of an automobile were not clearly established until Arkansas v.

Dougherty ex rel. Dougherty v. Department of Human Services

179 N.J. Super. 541 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1981

. § 1396 et seq., establishes a program commonly known as “Medicaid.” … It also establishes optional categories which a state may elect to make available to such persons.

Grenewicz v. Ligham

34 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 6, 1955

It is obvious that the housing space here qualified for decontrol or exclusion under the quoted section of federal law. … This amendment now relates to the premises in question and clearly excludes the space from rent control. For the reasons stated it, too, must be considered valid.

In Re Application of Moffat

142 N.J. Super. 217 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 8, 1976

Of course, it is not enough to show merely that legal votes were rejected; it must also be established that the number was "sufficient to change the result." N.J.S.A. 19:29-1(e). … Section 3 of the statute clearly provides that Every person appointed by the governing body * * * to fill a vacancy, either for the unexpired term or temporarily, shall have the qualifications required by statute to permit

Demeri v. Morris

194 N.J. Super. 554 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 13, 1983

No direct evidence was produced to establish this proposition. Testimony did tend to establish that juveniles regularly used Lynn Park as a practice course for their motorcycles. … Obviously, Kenneth was too young to qualify for a driver’s license to drive any motor vehicle over a public highway.

Cellucci v. Bronstein

277 N.J. Super. 506 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 6, 1994

In exchange for the absolute liability imposed on the employer, the Act grants immunity from common law negligence suits by employees. Ibid. … A lawyer's liability for malpractice cannot be established on an expert's premise of "I know it when I see it."