Case law

Poroznoff v. Alberti

161 N.J. Super. 414 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 1978

Plaintiff's attorney stated that while plaintiff could be so qualified, this distinction was not the issue before the court. … IV Even though New Jersey case law clearly distinguishes the relationship between a guest and a tenant, there is very little authority on whether an innkeeper may summarily remove a guest for nonpayment or disorderly behavior

State v. R.G.D.

208 N.J. Super. 385 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 28, 1986

.” *389 In adopting N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-26 the Legislature clearly showed an intention to deal forcefully with juveniles who commit serious offenses. … Edward Tobe, a highly qualified board certified psychiatrist, experienced in the evaluation and treatment of adjudicated delinquents.

Wheatly v. Sook Suh

217 N.J. Super. 233 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1987

Clearly, the parties intended that the mortgage contingency provision in the agreement should relate to the conventional mortgage to be applied for by defendants. … ords and phrases are not to be isolated but related to the context and the contractual scheme as a whole, and given the meaning that comports with the probable intent and purpose; and thus the literal sense of terms may be qualified

Macchi v. Connecticut General Insurance

354 N.J. Super. 64 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 2002

According to that letter, because plaintiff was not “occupying” the Corvette at the time of the accident, she could not qualify as an “insured person.” … That construction would render illusory the term of the policy establishing a $1,000,000 UM/UIM limit. See Cook-Sauvageau v.

Masone v. Levine

382 N.J. Super. 181 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 2005

In fact, the summary judgment record establishes that Grauer knew only what Levine represented to Woodward. … We decline to adopt a rule that an Affidavit of Merit immunizes the firm prosecuting a matter from Rule 1:4-8 sanctions.

Urban Farms, Inc. v. Seel

87 N.J. Super. 177 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 16, 1965

It appears that the president of plaintiff corporation orally informed defendants in January 1964 that an investigation of Jurgensen indicated that the firm was properly qualified and that it could become an approved builder … It is argued that the purchase of a lot from plaintiff by a builder (entitling him to approval) conclusively establishes his interest in this entire undertaking.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BARRY BERRY STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. KENNETH DANIELS STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. LEVELL BURNETT (17-06-1583, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 7, 2022

That analysis was insufficient, especially with respect to Berry's motion, given that the three defendants clearly operated at different levels of authority within the criminal operation. … The evidence seized from Berry's Sanford Avenue residence, for example, clearly shows his involvement in drug trafficking, but not his supervisory role within the organization.

In Re Langhaar

125 N.J. Eq. 374 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 28, 1939

Langhaar, appeal from the transfer inheritance tax levied in respect of the remainder interest of a trust fund established under said will. … Consideration however results in the inevitable conclusion that the clause above underlined was intended to be qualified by the clause "by reason of the failure of any contingency" c., (notwithstanding no comma immediately

Graziano v. MAYOR & TP. COMMITTEE OF MONTVILLE TP.

162 N.J. Super. 552 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 13, 1978

Clearly and literally, the bonds of the MUA are not and do not create a debt or obligation of the township. … Appellants' other contentions, such as that the contract lacks consideration, are clearly lacking in merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). Affirmed.

City Ass'n of Supervisors & Administrators v. State Operated School District

311 N.J. Super. 300 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 8, 1998

Here, the grievance qualified for arbitration because vacation entitlements for twelve-month employees in administrative positions are a term and condition of employment. … Clearly, the purpose of the State takeover was to make the local school district more efficient and responsive to educational and economic reform.

I'ASIA MORELAND VS. ESTATE OF WILLIAM PARKS (L-0227-11, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 28, 2021

Plaintiffs' traffic expert opined the intersection was "clearly a significant congestion point during arena events" and "[b]ased on crowd size during events, wider crosswalks may be warranted." … , discretionary immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:2-3, and police protection immunity.

Bloomfield v. ACADEMY OF MED. OF NJ

87 N.J. Super. 595 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 20, 1965

The goal of learning for its own sake was clearly manifest at the Institute, as judged by a partial list of its alumni "members," e.g., Albert Einstein, T.S. Eliot, Rheinhold Niebuhr, George F. … Super., at pp. 55-56) Although it cannot be denied that the Academy is performing a valuable service in giving instruction to already qualified physicians and dentists on a nonformalized basis, this does not establish it

Fox v. Stuyvesant Town, Inc.

3 N.J. Super. 408 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 9, 1949

This is clearly a non sequitur. The first approval being a lawful one, the second was unnecessary and meaningless. … The literal sense of the terms may be qualified by the context. The significance of a particular part of the writing is determined by a consideration of all its parts.

Jeremy Baratta v. City of Perth Amboy

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 6, 2024

So, they're clearly not sanctioning this behavior. It appears that they are dismissing it. Or [they are] trying to correct it. … of antagonism coupled with timing to establish a causal link."

MICHELLE WILLIAMS-STEVENS VS. NEWARK PUBLIC SCHOOLS (L-2944-13, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 23, 2019

the Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:4-6, and was otherwise immune because plaintiff could not establish the vestibule floor was in a dangerous condition of which defendant had actual or constructive notice, and in any event … Unfortunately, the trial court judge similarly did not address the well-established law on design immunity or explain how defendant's showing fell short.

Capella v. Board of Education

145 N.J. Super. 209 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 1976

Clearly, appellants are not engaged in a “full-time” occupation when they work for three hours on two nights a week. … In addition to the factors found to be significant in Schulz, we also noted the fact that the teacher there involved was not paid at the rate of pay established by the salary guide for a regular teacher but rather at a daily

SPECIAL POLICE ORGANIZATION v. CITY OF NEWARK (L-7121-19, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 25, 2022

POINT V THE DIRECTOR IS NOT ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY. … POINT IX NO PARTY DEFENDANT IS ENTITLED TO QUALIFIED IMMUNITY WITH REGARD TO VIOLATING THE CONSTITUTION, CRIMINAL LAW AND ENGAGING IN ULTRA VIRIOUS ACTS.

State of New Jersey v. R.A.M.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 29, 2025

Therefore, D.P. qualified as a victim of domestic violence under N.J.S.A. 2C:12-1(b)(13). … The Legislature clearly intended for courts to apply aggravating factor fifteen to defendants that have an established history of committing domestic violence and are convicted of committing a new offense against a victim

MORTON v. Mayor & Council of Tp. of Clark

102 N.J. Super. 84 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 28, 1968

This power of administration within the confines of the local ordinance is qualified in situations where a party applies for a variance to establish a "use" in an area which excludes such "use." … If the variance is approved, the applicant is entitled to a permit to establish such a use.

Yormack v. FARMERS'COOPERATIVE ASS'N. OF NJ

11 N.J. Super. 416 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 22, 1951

Furthermore it was not necessary for the plaintiff to prove by direct evidence the causal relation between the use of the carbolineum and the injurious result; it could be established by circumstantial evidence. … The power to confine a new trial to the question of damages is exercised with caution and only in those cases where it clearly appears that the improper inducements or impulses did not affect the other issues.