Case law

Triano v. Division of State Lottery

306 N.J. Super. 114 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 1997

However, the Lucky Anniversary game rules clearly state under Section 12-Final Decision, that “[t]he Director shall make all final deci *121 sions regarding the awarding of prizes.” … We noted that the State could have established the program by administrative rules and could have provided for agency adjudication of claims.

State v. Reevey

213 N.J. Super. 37 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 7, 1986

This approach is clearly applicable in our consideration of N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6b and N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.51. See, e.g., State v. … The inclusion of this qualifying language in N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6b evidences the Legislature’s intent to affect the parole eligibility scheme established by the Parole Act.

Schock v. Bd. of Rev., Div. Empl. SEC.

89 N.J. Super. 118 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 21, 1965

The arbitrator's decision directing Schock's reinstatement, binding by contract upon the employer, demonstrates the lack of finality in the employer's qualified right to discharge. … Chief Justice Weintraub clearly set forth this rule of statutory construction in New Capitol Bar & Grill Corp. v.

Redding v. Burlington County Welfare Board

123 N.J. Super. 572 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1973

been deprived of parental support or care by reason of the death, continued absence from the home, or physical or mental incapacity of a parent, and who is living with any one of several listed redatives and who is age-qualified … In this the AFDC program differs from several other assistance programs established by the State.

New Jersey Dyfs. v. Sa

382 N.J. Super. 525 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 2, 2006

On appeal, she argues that insufficient credible evidence was presented to clearly and convincingly establish the first, second and fourth prongs of the "best interest" test initially formulated by the Court in New Jersey … s mother and the establishment of a residence either with S.A.'s father or in Paterson. We additionally note S.A.'

Peterson v. Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co.

32 N.J. Super. 23 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 3, 1954

American Paper Co., supra , the former Court of Errors and Appeals clearly sets forth the elements necessary to establish an accord and satisfaction ( 83 N.J.L. 709 ): "Now, of course, the rule of law is that where a claim … The party seeking to settle for a less sum than is claimed to be due must, by his words or conduct when making the offer, clearly inform the other of what is sought and expected.

State v. Thomas

114 N.J. Super. 360 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 5, 1971

New Jersey's constitutional guarantee, although narrow in its phraseology, was not meant to restrict the common law protection, but rather to insure against the contention that a defendant may be entitled to immunity from … Maryland, supra , is whether the established rule of federal law embodied in the Fifth Amendment guarantee against double jeopardy. We do not hesitate to hold that it is." Ashe v.

Tomasi v. Tp. of Wayne

126 N.J. Super. 169 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 1973

Super. 304 (Law Div. 1973), the court declared invalid an ordinance regulating the opening and closing hours of all retail business establishments. … The State's concern for public safety in barber establishments is reflected in the barbering statute. A person is not qualified to receive a certificate of registration unless he is "of good moral and temperate habits".

Behnke v. NJ Highway Authority

25 N.J. Super. 149 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 28, 1953

appropriation in paragraph 5 of L. 1952, c. 17, been confined to one fiscal year, or had the Legislature provided in the general appropriation bill to meet the State's obligation under the guaranty for one year only, such provision clearly … And I am not unmindful that a legislative enactment should not be invalidated by the courts unless it clearly appears that the organic law has been violated and that the burden of showing such violation rests upon him who

MARK J. MOLZ VS. THERESA D. MOLZ N/K/A THERESA D. MITCHELL (FM-11-0626-12, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 2020

The burden of establishing that an asset or any portion thereof is immune from distribution rests on the party claiming its immunity. Pacifico v. Pacifico, 190 N.J. 258, 269 (2007). … Plaintiff simply failed to meet his burden of proof to establish that any premarital or corporate assets were immune from distribution. Pacifico, 190 N.J. at 269.

Ware v. Prudential Ins. Co.

220 N.J. Super. 135 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 21, 1987

and establish objectives. … Manpower Responsibilities Function The VP, RM is responsible for staffing all Districts with sufficient numbers of qualified Management personnel.

THE ESTATE OF FRANK JOSEPH COVELLO, JR. VS. THE COUNTY OF MORRIS (L-1831-17, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 22, 2021

As a starting point to our TCA analysis, N.J.S.A. 59:2-1(b) provides that "[a]ny liability of a public entity established by this act is subject to any immunity of the public entity . . . ." … Utilizing a similar analytical framework, N.J.S.A. 59:3-2 establishes discretionary immunity for public employees.

Perth Amboy Gen. Hosp. v. BD. OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS OF CTY. OF MIDDLESEX

158 N.J. Super. 556 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 11, 1978

If the county adjuster, who administers the program for the county, is satisfied the care qualifies for credit, it is figured in. … What about the statutory language, "Payment * * * shall be at rates established by the commissioner?"

Macedonian Orthodox Church v. Planning Board

269 N.J. Super. 562 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 13, 1994

John’s homeless shelter on the church’s property, qualified as an accessory use “customarily incident[al] to [a church’s] principal use.” Id. at 417, 479 A.2d 935 . … Clearly, there was a substantial increase in the proposed building size from that of the approved 1978 building and other significant changes.

Gabriele Pietz-Vogel v. Cathy Oliver-Hommes

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 2026

Defendant argued dismissal was warranted because the litigation privilege immunized her alleged statements as they related to the guardianship litigation and were a product of that action. … The court clearly indicated if an appeal was filed the award would be stayed. Thus, we are convinced the court appropriately awarded fees, committing no abuse of discretion.

Mahoney v. Mahoney

182 N.J. Super. 598 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 9, 1982

Leveck's contention that Inman had established in Kentucky the principle that a professional license was a marital asset, the court explained that In Inman , the only way by which equity could have been achieved was by the … A person qualified by education for a given profession may choose not to practice it, may fail at it, or may practice in a specialty, location or manner which generates less than the average income enjoyed by fellow professionals

Sheenan v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. of NY

41 N.J. Super. 213 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 3, 1956

The contention is that he was not qualified to testify on those subjects. … We think $2,500 is clearly and unequivocally excessive. *221 But though the jury erred, still we have a conviction that the error did not affect its determination of the other issues. Gardner v.

In re the Burlington County Board

188 N.J. Super. 343 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 21, 1983

that union members are being discriminated against; officers are guarding empty cells; applications by prospective employees are being discouraged; sheriff’s officers are being used for the private purposes of the sheriff; qualified … The board of freeholders are directly concerned since their employees, paid with their monies, are the ones affected, and the requested investigation clearly involves financial affairs to which the statute relates.

State of New Jersey v. Kashif K. Patterson

435 N.J. Super. 498 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 9, 2014

Defendant could not expect his statement to be immune from prosecutorial comment in closing. … Instead, Subsection 6(f) clearly and unambiguously lists only N.J.S.A. 2C:35-3, -4, -5, -6, and -7.

New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency

447 N.J. Super. 337 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 4, 2016

that the admission of such evidence constitutes "plain error" — that is, that the admission of such evidence was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." … Contrary to defendant's argument, expert testimony is not required to establish that an individual is intoxicated due to alcohol. See State v.