Case law

De Vitis v. New Jersey Racing Com'n

202 N.J. Super. 484 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 1985

An examination of the Commission's Final Decision establishes that it fully complied with these guidelines and that De Vitis's contention is therefore clearly without merit. … [e]very person is qualified to be a witness" at an administrative hearing. N.J.A.C. 1:1-15.2(e). See N.J.A.C. 1:1-15.6.

Casseus v. ELIZABETH GENERAL MED.

287 N.J. Super. 396 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 16, 1996

In that case the Court held that the plaintiff must carry the initial burden of proof to establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination. Id., 411 U.S. at 802 , 93 S.Ct. at 1824 , 36 L.Ed. 2d at 677 . … Clearly, an inability to perform the job is a legitimate reason under LAD to discharge (or to fail to promote, or to demote) an employee. See Fowle v.

Crifasi v. Governing Body of Bor. of Oakland

151 N.J. Super. 98 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 20, 1977

Defendants' further argument that the "miscellaneous" designation on the agenda adequately gave notice of the Mulcahy appointment is clearly without merit. … However, notwithstanding this finding, this court must further conclude that even under this less restrictive construction of the term, plaintiffs have failed to establish that the Oakland "Independents" are such a "political

State v. Simpson

365 N.J. Super. 444 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 22, 2003

Rather, in each case, the corporate surety, supported by seventeen verbatim briefs, challenges the constitutionality of R. 3:26-6 and its companion rules, R. 1:13 — 3(d) and (e), which provide, respectively, for the establishment … But that constitutional right is clearly qualified by, among other limitations, compliance with the conditions of bail not only by the principal but also by the surety.

A-0436-24/a-2145-24 – State of the Jersey v. Norman millner/state of New Jersey v. Shaquan M. Gregg

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 23, 2026

addresses the legal question of whether the out-of-state A-0436-24 15 conviction is 'similar to' a qualifying … For the reasons stated, we disagree with the trial court's approach, the Legislature clearly imposed a duty upon the State in subsection (b)(3) to perform the "similar to" analysis.

Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. ALLIED CRUDE VEG. OIL, ETC.

89 N.J. Super. 518 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 1965

There has been filed in the cause an affidavit of an officer of Irving which indicates that Irving is qualified pursuant to the New Jersey Banking Act of 1948 to transact business in New Jersey only as executor or testamentary … It seeks to demonstrate that the only activities in which Irving engages in New Jersey are those for which it is qualified, pursuant to the New Jersey Banking Act of 1948.

Great A. & P. Tea Co. v. A. & P. Trucking Corp.

51 N.J. Super. 412 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 28, 1958

In the latter respect, at least, the facts are clearly distinguishable from the instant case. … Legal scholars are of the opinion that such a poll, if properly qualified, should be admitted into evidence and not excluded on the ground of hearsay. Sorensen & Sorensen, "Opinion Research Evidence," 28 N.Y.U.L.

Forstrom v. Byrne

341 N.J. Super. 45 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 2001

Turning to the proper standard established in Brown v. … Limiting IDEA services to qualified "private schools" reasonably advances that interest by steering scarce educational resources toward those qualified educational environments. Cf. Murphy v.

Estate of Colquhoun v. Estate of Colquhoun

177 N.J. Super. 491 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 1981

In our view, therefore, the reimbursement issue need never be reached because well-settled and long established principles of equity compel the extinguishment of the mortgage in these circumstances. … This being so, there was no longer a mortgage in esse during the lives of the cotenants and clearly then, no basis for its revival thereafter.

Hipsley v. Hipsley

161 N.J. Super. 119 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 1978

We now hold that where equitable distribution is sought pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23, an earlier separation agreement will be a bar to such relief only if, and to the extent that, it can qualify as a property settlement, … The record in this matter clearly indicates that the parties never considered the husband's *124 pension plan in reaching the terms of the agreement.

State v. Purnell

394 N.J. Super. 28 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 18, 2007

The judge found that the State carried its burden of establishing defendant's competency, and defendant was tried, convicted and sentenced. … Counsel qualified his affirmative response "[w]ithout waiving any of the arguments [he] made in the past leading up to this trial."

Orthopaedic Assoc. v. Dept. of Banking

405 N.J. Super. 54 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 20, 2009

AICRA required DOBI to establish "standards for the certification" of MROs. N.J.S.A. 39:6A-5.2(a). … See the standards established in the Alternate Dispute Resolution Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:23A-13.

State v. Burgos

200 N.J. Super. 6 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 12, 1985

The trial court conducted an Evid.R. 8 hearing as to Abril's qualifications to be a witness and found him qualified. … Nevertheless, the trial court's decision on Abril's competency is clearly supported by the record. See State in the Interest of R.R., 79 N.J. 97, 113 (1979).

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Greenberg

376 N.J. Super. 623 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 10, 2004

He did not operate a diagnostic clinic as part of his practice nor was he qualified to do so. 2. … This court is clearly and convincingly satisfied that Dr. Greenberg and his corporations knowingly violated N.J.S.A. 17:33A-4(a)(1), (2), and (3).

Wilkerson v. CO Porter MacHinery Co.

237 N.J. Super. 282 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1989

The real question is whether the product-line theory of successor liability as carved out in Ramirez is so narrow as to exclude (and immunize) a purchaser of assets in bankruptcy. … However, there are four established exceptions to the general rule of corporate successor nonliability in asset acquisitions.

Tanis v. Township of Hampton

306 N.J. Super. 588 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 1997

event, the occasional flights in and out of the property since 1970 were insufficient to establish a nonconforming use. … Durrett, supra, upholding a finding that “an airstrip was not customarily associated with residential use” and stating “[a] rare association of uses cannot qualify as customary, though the uses need not be joined in a majority

HERITAGE AT TOWNE LAKE, LLC. v. Planning Bd.

422 N.J. Super. 75 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 23, 2010

The Board contends that Heritage failed to demonstrate that it has a valid final approval to qualify under the conversion statute. … The testimony from Heritage is sufficient to establish that the increase will be minimal. There are no proofs to the contrary.

State v. Devlin

234 N.J. Super. 545 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1989

Clearly, the evidence relied upon by the State to establish the recklessness required to prove death by auto went far beyond the mere proof that defendant was intoxicated, which was only a component of defendant's recklessness … The judge must first determine a tentative sentence that comports with the strictures and guidelines that the Code establishes for a third-degree crime.

State of New Jersey v. Jessica S. Matrongolo

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 3, 2024

Accordingly, we give "no deference to the trial court's 'interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts.'" State v. Maurer, 438 N.J. Super. 402, 411 (App. … Rather, the Manual's drafters clearly titled the section "Legal Eligibility" and declined to condition eligibility on any other requirements.

River Development Corp. v. Liberty Corp.

51 N.J. Super. 447 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 16, 1958

We are not persuaded that plaintiff has fully established its case in either regard. … Such acts, bearing the form of legislative licenses, are not uncommon, and their effect has been clearly defined.