Case law

Campo Jersey, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

390 N.J. Super. 366 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 8, 2007

The regulation then goes on to provide a non-exclusive list of subject vendors, declaring that “[t]he following establishments, as well as other establishments engaged in the sale of food and drink for consumption on or off … generally and uniformly to all similarly situated persons; (3) is designed to operate only in future cases, that is prospectively; (4) prescribes a legal standard or directive that is not otherwise expressly provided by or clearly

Dolecky v. Borough of Riverton

223 N.J. Super. 354 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1987

Our criminal laws would be subject to capricious treatment if they could be qualified by the disparate legislative actions of various municipalities. … for aesthetic purposes (permissible under Miller) or otherwise clearly subordinate and not the opposite.

Dept. of Transportation v. PSC Resources, Inc.

159 N.J. Super. 154 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 10, 1978

The act thus provides for governmental immunity except in those very specific areas in which the statute permits suit. Fuller, supra at 426 . … Second, the action seeks to enforce a section of the Water Quality Improvement Act, which is clearly designed to minimize pollution or impairment of the environment.

NJ STATE COLLEGE LOCALS v. State

251 N.J. Super. 577 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 19, 1991

PERC recognized as much when it concluded that only qualified preemption applied to the disputed regulations. PERC found that the presumption of preemption was not rebutted. … The record clearly reflects that Council was given an opportunity to express its views on the regulations before they were submitted to the Board for final adoption.

State v. Wright

196 N.J. Super. 516 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 19, 1984

The novelty of New Jersey's death-penalty statute is that the only defendants that will be permitted to plead guilty are those who qualify under the sentencing guidelines in the act. … The wisdom and social desirability of plea negotiations and plea agreements are now firmly established and accepted, especially in this age of ever-growing criminal dockets and backlogs.

State of New Jersey v. Jorge L. Gomez

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 19, 2025

A-0364-23 7 Moreover, the court reasoned although the punishment may be different, the statutes clearly indicate that distribution and possession with the intent to distribute are … Although a lone fact rarely establishes probable cause, "a successful 'controlled [drug] buy "typically will be persuasive evidence in establishing probable cause."'" Ibid. (quoting Jones, 179 N.J. at 392).

Borough of Oceanport v. Hughes

186 N.J. Super. 109 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 3, 1982

If otherwise qualified, N.J.S.A. 19:31—5, those persons are eligible voters in Oceanport and in the Shore Regional School District *114 election. Marks v. New Hanover Tp., 124 N.J.Super. 504 (App.Div.1973). … Specifically do plaintiffs argue that by any standards the use of 1980 census figures to determine populations but 1970 census figures to set the excluded inhabitants is clearly irrational.

Ciesla v. New Jersey Department of Health

429 N.J. Super. 127 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 4, 2012

Bd. of Review, 35 N.J. 601, 606 , 174 A.2d 481 (1961) (“When the Legislature has clearly defined a term, the courts are bound by that definition.”); Nebinger v. Md. Cas. … Hence, to the extent that prior decisions of this court have stated or presumed that the OPRA exemption of deliberative materials is qualified, we part company with those decisions.

Uaw, Region 9 of the Uaw v. New Jersey Governor Philip Murphy

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 26, 2026

However, that federal "rational basis" approach is qualified by what are known as "tiered" levels of scrutiny. … "A statute must clearly and irremediably violate[ ] the ban on special legislation to be invalidated." City of Jersey City v. Farmer, 329 N.J. Super. 27, 38 (App. Div.)

Peper v. Princeton University Bd. of Trustees

151 N.J. Super. 15 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 4, 1977

She was qualified for the promotion. Her request for promotion was denied. Men having no greater qualifications were subsequently promoted. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. … In this posture, and in view of plaintiff's establishment of a prima facie case, it then became incumbent upon the University to come forward with an explanation at least suggestive that the admitted disparate treatment was

FRATERNAL ORDER OF POLICE, NEWARK LODGE NO. 12 VS. CITY OF NEWARK (C-000177-16, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

459 N.J. Super. 458 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 18, 2019

A qualified interpreter will be obtained from an official registry of interpreters or another reliable source. … Instead, for preemption purposes, the Legislature's intent to occupy the field "must appear clearly." Ibid. (emphasis added).

Brechman v. Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.

182 N.J. Super. 259 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 16, 1981

By "independent" the court presumably was referring to those cases not controlled by the statute, where the proposition stated clearly applies. … As Kufta makes clear, even the payment of the full contract price is not sufficient to qualify under the doctrine. Such action is compensable by damages. Id. at 228 .

Konop v. Rosen

425 N.J. Super. 391 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 25, 2012

However, the notation was clearly hearsay. Flores acknowledged that the consultation report was based upon what others told him. … Whether plaintiff "was moving too much" during the colonoscopy was clearly relevant and not subject to any condition precedent.

University of Medicine & Dentistry v. University of Medicine & Dentistry

223 N.J. Super. 323 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 8, 1988

of qualified faculty” and/or “to retain an outstanding individual in *326 a subject area in which replacement is difficult.” … Additionally, it determined negotiation was not preempted by State pension statutes in that by enacting N.J.S.A. 10:5-2.2 the Legislature “clearly and unequivocally” authorized institutions to continue (or not to continue

Chemos Corp. v. STATE DEP.

237 N.J. Super. 359 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 15, 1989

The legislative intent was clearly expressed in its finding ... that the generation, handling, storage and disposal of hazardous substances and wastes pose an inherent danger of exposing the citizens, property and natural … qualifies for a de minimus exemption from ECRA requirements, a sampling plan may be required. [12] We disregard reasons proffered in DEP's brief not of record. [13] For a detailed analysis of the effect of this classification

State of New Jersey v. K.H.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 21, 2026

But in this instance, there is another basis upon which to find that the constitutional error was harmless: the record clearly shows defendant was previously convicted of six qualifying crimes committed over the span of … Given the number of qualifying predicate convictions, defendant's contention is mere speculation.

Lapidoth v. Telcordia Technologies, Inc.

420 N.J. Super. 411 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 9, 2011

Similarly, when the facts clearly and uncontrovertibly establish the effect of a disclaimer’s content, the court can resolve it as a matter of law. Ibid. … Defendant contends that Cocea was given the ARIS release manager position because she was better qualified.

New Jersey Builders Ass'n v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

306 N.J. Super. 93 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 10, 1997

To do so would violate not only the terms of this department's MOU with the State Planning Commission hut the spirit of the State Planning Act, which states clearly that the State Plan is to be used to provide policy guidance … Thus, even if an administrative order satisfies all the Metromedia criteria, it need not go through the rule-making process if it qualifies as an intra-agency statement.

Eberhardt v. Perolin

48 N.J. Eq. 592 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 1891

Thus the force of the rule, which establishes a prima fade meaning, is destroyed. Among these cases is that of Colton v. Colton, 127 U. … Besides, to use it as a connection with that which follows, requires a parenthetical qualification in advance of the matter qualified. Such was not the-testator’s style in writing.

Snyder v. Mekhjian

244 N.J. Super. 281 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 30, 1990

In addition, the court ruled that BCBC was not entitled either to charitable immunity pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-7 or to the $10,000 damages limitation of N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-8. … The physicians are clearly exempt under the holding and rationale of Newmark v. Gimbel's, Inc., 54 N.J. 585 , 258 A. 2d 697 (1969). AABB is not itself a supplier or tester of blood.