Case law

Sudersan v. Royal

386 N.J. Super. 246 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 23, 2005

Here, defendant's income was low enough to qualify for a full rent subsidy of $818 per month. In other words, 100% of her rent was paid by the Section 8 subsidy program. … Clearly the trial court lacked jurisdiction to grant plaintiff the relief ordered. For that reason, we vacate the judgment of possession and dismiss plaintiff's summary dispossess action.

State v. Burten

219 N.J. Super. 339 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 1986

Clearly, in this case both failures to make contributions to the pension and/or welfare funds are separate maintainable causes. … S.A. 2A:170-90.2 clearly “relates to” an employee benefit plan.

Aichele v. Borough of Oakley

1 N.J. Super. 621 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 1948

Though the pecuniary interest of the plaintiff is small, the standing of one otherwise qualified to question the resolution is not to be determined by the mere matter of dollars and cents involved. Cf. Schwartz v. … The term "assessments" as read in the context therein clearly means municipal charges and not the value of land subject to taxation.

C.A.M. v. R.A.W.

237 N.J. Super. 532 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 9, 1990

We recognize that in all three of these out-of-state cases the issue arose by way of a father’s counterclaim to a suit seeking to establish paternity and support for the child, whereas, in this case, it is the mother who … Those principles are clearly applicable in this case.

De Angelis v. Jamesway Dept. Store

205 N.J. Super. 519 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 22, 1985

Clearly, the employee may be endangering her job. Indeed, loss of employment may be one reason why an employee would participate in the interview. … Here the conduct clearly exceeded the bounds of the statutory privilege.

Township of Princeton v. Bleiman

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

Miko v. Miko

283 N.J. Super. 287 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 17, 1994

The need for an equitable remedy from the court therefore is clearly present. … The case at bar is analogous to DeCeglia in that it involves a support obligation which was clearly established.

Citro v. Reilly

99 N.J. Super. 215 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 5, 1968

Defendants, in answer to the complaint, allege compliance with all applicable laws and further urge that their predecessors in office established a procedure which they followed as the established procedure. … They are clearly violative thereof and were unlawful. O’Donnell v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of the County of Morris, 31 N. J. 434 (1960), is factually directly on point with the instant case.

State v. Robinson

74 N.J. Super. 305 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 10, 1962

Such possession conferred standing upon her, and as such her constitutional rights of privacy were clearly invaded. Jones v. United States, 362 U.S. 257 , 80 S.Ct. 725 , 4 L.Ed. 2 d 697 (1960). … In the instant case there is nothing to establish that the search was directed against this defendant.

Suesserman v. Newark Bd. of Adjustment

61 N.J. Super. 28 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 12, 1960

None of the remaining findings of the board could in present circumstances qualify as such a special reason. The defendant Steiner relies on Mistretta v. City of Newark, 33 N.J. … similar to the present one, differs however in the material respect that in that case there was an extensive finding as to the benefit the proposed off-street parking facilities would confer upon the surrounding area which clearly

Pagano v. Zoning Bd. of Adjustment

257 N.J. Super. 382 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 1992

However, a full review of his testimony demonstrates sufficient breadth of experience and depth of knowledge to have qualified him as an expert which the Board impliedly, if not expressly, acknowledged. … Super. 445, 452 , 288 A. 2d 308 (Ch.Div. 1972). [8] In the present case, the applicants did not attempt to establish that the pistol range qualified as an inherently beneficial use, a position that would have necessitated

Fasolo v. Pensions Div. Trustees

181 N.J. Super. 434 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 1981

Subsequently a series of ordinances were passed by the borough establishing the salary for the position. … Yet a municipal judge clearly is subject to little municipal control, though PERS agrees that for purposes of N.J.S.A. 43:15A-6 r his salary is compensation.

Kenney v. Scientific, Inc.

212 N.J. Super. 6 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 13, 1986

Although generators which are public entities are immune under N.J.S.A. 59:9-2c from the award of punitive damages, all other defendants enjoy no such immunity. Thus, if the trier of fact should determine under Berg v. … This court trusts that its discussion will clearly reveal that in granting the motion to strike the demands for trial by jury, it has no intention of flouting constitutional requirements, but believes that constitutional

PRB Enterprises, Inc. v. South Brunswick Planning Board

205 N.J. Super. 225 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 8, 1985

While proposed uses may be identified by qualifying labels, i.e., “neighborhood” retail sales of goods and services, “low traffic generating” is an elusive concept without standards to identify its meaning. … Even if it had, the Municipal Land Use Law requires that the ordinance provide that such conditional uses be granted by the Planning Board “... according to definite specifications and standards which shall be clearly set

Leonardo Arias v. Elite Mortgage Group, Inc

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 23, 2015

The judge reasoned that the bank was not required to provide plaintiffs with a loan modification, based on its determination that they did not qualify for one. … Id. at 557 n.2. 9 A-4599-12T1  The summary judgment record clearly establishes that plaintiffs failed

In Re Commitment of DS

359 N.J. Super. 28 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 13, 2002

In re Commitment of W.K., 159 N.J. 1,2 , 731 A.2d 482 (1999); citing Krol, supra, as establishing the standard for such commitments. … [The factual findings are omitted from the published edition of the opinion as not qualifying for publication under R. 1:36-2(d)].

Koseoglu v. Wry

431 N.J. Super. 140 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 22, 2013

The charge explained the jury’s obligation to make credibility determinations for all witnesses, including those qualified as experts. … Generally, “[t]o establish a prima facie case of negligence in a medical-malpractice action, a plaintiff must present expert testimony establishing (1) the applicable standard of care; (2) a deviation from that standard of

Kane v. Hartz Mountain Industries

278 N.J. Super. 129 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 13, 1994

He left what was clearly a judicial function to the unbridled discretion of the jury. … It is well established that an employee's contributory negligence is generally available as a defense when the employee sues a third person in an ordinary negligence action.

Borough of Belmar Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n of Local 50 v. Borough of Belmar

174 N.J. Super. 370 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 2, 1980

By comparison, “regular” members of the department undergo a 14-week training at the Police Academy and qualify in weapons other than the pistol. … The Legislature established the Police Training Commission in 1961. N.J.S.A. 52:17B-66 et seq. As originally enacted, N.J.

D.J.L. v. Armour Pharmaceutical Co.

307 N.J. Super. 61 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 29, 1997

system, rendering the immune system unable to protect the body from opportunistic infections. … Every citizen has an interest in seeing those public funds recovered if culpability is ultimately established for transmitting the HIV infection.