Case law

Parrot v. Chiselko

74 N.J. Super. 138 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 4, 1962

This document clearly states that it is a: "RECEIPT FOR DEPOSIT PREMIUM — NOT EVIDENCE OF INSURANCE." … Our research indicates that as of December 1961 only New Jersey, North Dakota and Maryland have established Unsatisfied Judgment Funds, although New York has as its equivalent a Motor Vehicle Indemnification Corporation.

Kvaerner Process v. Barham-McBride

368 N.J. Super. 190 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 6, 2004

The judge found that the transactions between the parties nominally qualified for construction lien eligibility and that the materials and labor evidenced by certain invoices had actually been delivered to the project. … Defendants were clearly entitled to such discovery as was necessary for them to meet the issue posed by plaintiff's complaint, i.e., to establish the validity of the lien claim.

PAUL J. BANACH VS. ALEX TARAKANOV(L-6238-13, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 12, 2017

N.J.R.E. 702 identifies when expert testimony is permissible and requires the experts to be qualified in their respective fields. N.J.R.E. 703 addresses the foundation for expert testimony. … Immunity applies as long as the insurer establishes the following: (1) the named insured's coverage limits were at least the minimum coverage required by law; (2) the named insured's

State v. Wishnatsky

258 N.J. Super. 67 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1990

She could clearly see defendant through the windows. … N.J.S.A. 2C:l-4 clearly sets forth that: a.

State v. Oliver

92 N.J. Super. 228 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 23, 1966

here presented required the trial court to honor the defendant's motion, as "essential to assure a fair determination of the issue[s]" of defendant's guilt of the charge on which he was being tried, within the exception to immunity … We take the view that defendant's position at trial was clearly right and that the weight of the best reasoned cases on the point support him.

D.M.H. VS. H.G.H. (FM-09-2148-15, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 12, 2020

However, such "[p]roperty 'clearly qualifies for distribution' when it is 'attributable to the expenditure of effort by either spouse' during marriage." Pascale v. Pascale, 140 N.J. 583, 609 (1995). … "The A-4267-17T2 24 burden of establishing immunity rests upon the spouse asserting such immunity."

Nesta v. Meyer

100 N.J. Super. 434 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 22, 1968

Most of the final answer was clearly not responsive and could have been, but was not made the subject of a motion to strike by counsel for the plaintiff. … He urges that defendant's negligence was clearly established and that any finding that plaintiff was guilty of contributory negligence was so contrary to the weight of the evidence as to justify the conclusion that it was

Matter of Souder

204 N.J. Super. 132 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 20, 1984

The opinion unequivocally advised the Director that his interpretation was "clearly at odds with Federal regulations". It noted that the: ... … Section 45 C.F.R. 233.20(a)(3)(vi)(b) provides that in establishing eligibility and the amount of payment: ...

Flores v. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF PUB. EMP. RET. SYS.

287 N.J. Super. 274 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 13, 1996

Slip and fall type accidents ordinarily do not qualify as traumatic events under these tests. Maynard v. Board of Trustees of Teachers' Pension & Annuity Fund, 113 N.J. 169 , 549 A. 2d 1213 (1988); Ciecwisz v. … On the other hand, the Court held that correction guards who were assaulted by inmates "clearly sustained injuries as a result of `a great rush of force or uncontrollable power.'" Gable v.

Fairview Cemetery Co. v. Kingsley

106 N.J. Super. 13 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 10, 1969

Obviously, it does not qualify under any of the other specified categories. Fairview Cemetery Company has operated the cemetery in Fairview for about 67 years. … This clearly indicates that “charitable institutions,” as such, are not deemed to include “cemetery companies.”

Spirito v. New Jersey Real Estate Comm'n

180 N.J. Super. 180 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 31, 1981

It is well established that each part of a statute should be construed in a manner consistent with the principal legislative intent. State v. Bander, 56 N.J. 196, 201 (1970). … Rather, a reading of the statutory language, along with its historical development, leads us to conclude that the legislature intended to immunize attorneys from the provisions of the Real Estate License Act only with respect

In Re Petition of South Lakewood Water Co.

115 N.J. Super. 352 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 1971

This act clearly establishes that municipal consent is a prerequisite to any extension of service by a water company to territory within its jurisdiction. … In effect, the PUC's decision that the laying of Lakewood Water's pipes in the roads should be allowed as "necessary and proper for the public convenience," was a finding that at the time Lakewood Water was better qualified

DS v. East Brunswick Tp. Bd. of Ed.

188 N.J. Super. 592 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 15, 1983

The Education Act, however, is not silent on what qualifies as a free appropriate public education (FAPE). … The State Board tells us that, prior to enactment of the state regulation, responsibility for the maintenance of residentially-placed handicapped children was not clearly defined and varied by district and school.

NEW JERSEY ASS'N OF SCH. v. Davy

409 N.J. Super. 467 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 2, 2009

If that interpretation were clearly correct, we, like the parties, would be unable to identify readily any officer or employee of a school district's board of education who would fall within the definition. … The Association's claim that its qualified prospective members may suffer the impact of this regulation lacks sufficient merit to warrant comment. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Communications Workers of America AFL-CIO v. Clymer

292 N.J. Super. 138 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 7, 1996

An individual may practice psychology without a license only if he or she qualifies under one of the exemptions found at N.J.SA 45:14B-6. … Clark, 15 N.J. 334, 341 , 104 A.2d 685 (1954) (citations omitted) (“the principle is well established by a wealth of authority that resort may be had to long usage, contemporaneous construction and practical interpretation

Federbush v. Bd. of Educ. of Borough of Carteret

6 N.J. Super. 70 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 22, 1949

The respondent contends that the intent and purpose of the board in adopting the amended salary guide clearly indicated that a teacher qualifying for an increase in grade would not receive the increase in one step, but at … *Page 75 We are of the opinion that appellant's compensation was controlled by the salary guide established by the local board's resolution adopted in September, 1944, as amended in December, 1946, and made effective as of

Glen J. Heuman v. Wayne Heuman

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 2023

At bottom, plaintiffs fail to establish defendants' conduct qualified as an intentional wrong under the statute or the case law. … We are unconvinced the ostensible lack of coverage under defendants' CGL policy warrants an exception the WCA as established by the Legislature.

Finderne Mgmt. Co., Inc. v. Barrett

355 N.J. Super. 170 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 20, 2002

As a result, the plaintiff employers have established single employer ERISA plans even though the EPIC Plan itself does not qualify as an ERISA plan. … As the Finderne plaintiffs state: "Although the EPIC Plan is clearly not an ERISA plan, it appears that Finderne established its own, single-employer ERISA plan by virtue of arranging to provide benefits to its employees.

Township of Springfield v. Union County Park Commission

163 N.J. Super. 332 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 11, 1978

[It. 1971, c. 370, § 2] Defendant Commission contends that the above statutes are not applicable, that it is not liable for taxes under the same and that it is immune from liability under the terms of N. J. 8. … Although the establishment of park commissions is expressly authorized by the Legislature under N. J. S.

Matter of Grand Jury Re Acceturo

242 N.J. Super. 281 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 27, 1990

It is well-established that "[t]he legal justification for commitment for civil contempt is to secure compliance. … We envision that in appropriate circumstances the court may, without a hearing, grant a motion by the State for summary dismissal of the contemnor's *290 petition where the petition is clearly without merit. Cf.