Case law

NJ Assoc. Ins. Agents v. HOSP. SERV. PLAN.

128 N.J. Super. 472 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 1974

The distinction between "medical service corporations" and "health and accident insurers" was clearly set forth by our Supreme Court in Group Health Ins. of N.J. v. … Clearly, as to the "hospitalization" services and supplies (items 1 to 9 in Art.

Heaton v. State Health Ben. Com'n

264 N.J. Super. 141 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1993

The Program was first established and described in the New Jersey Health Benefits Program Act in 1961. L. 1961, c. 49; N.J.S.A. 52:14-17.25 to -33. … The Commission is created by N.J.S.A. 52:14-17.27 to "establish a health benefits program for the employees of the State * * * [and to] establish rules and regulations as may be deemed reasonable and necessary for the administration

State v. Ogburne

235 N.J. Super. 113 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 1989

These arguments are clearly without merit and do not require extended discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). … Defendant does not dispute that he qualified for sentencing as a persistent offender pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3a.

Montiel v. JOANNE INGERSOLL & ALLSTATE INS. CO.

347 N.J. Super. 246 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 21, 2001

The original discovery period was established based on the rules in effect prior to September 2000 under the differentiated case management program in effect in this vicinage. … Barbera, 328 N.J.Super. 424 , 746 A. 2d 68 (App.Div.2000) (in the context of late filings, attorney carelessness does not qualify as exceptional circumstances) and Packaging Industries Ltd. v.

Deedra Brewer v. William Henderson, III

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 2025

In a written decision, the court found Henderson produced evidence clearly establishing the shed was encroaching on his parcel and plaintiff produced no convincing evidence to the contrary. … immunity; (5) Miller recklessly removed the utility pole; (6) Klaudi and Jamison acted in concert with Vizzard to take plaintiff's property at a meeting of the township governing body; (7) plaintiff obtained title to

New Brunswick Cellular Telephone Co. v. Zoning Board of Adjustment

307 N.J. Super. 560 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 29, 1997

Westwood Zoning Bd. of Adjustment, 138 N.J. 285, 287 , 650 A.2d 340 (1994), established the standards for reviewing an application to deviate “from a specification or standard ... pertaining solely to a conditional use” under … CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Board’s rejection of Com-cast’s application for a d(3) variance was clearly arbitrary, capricious and unreasonable.

Chirino v. Proud 2 Haul, Inc.

458 N.J. Super. 308 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 30, 2017

However, this limitation is "subject to finite, qualified exceptions." Robinson , supra , 200 N.J. at 20 , 974 A.2d 1057 . … See Witt , supra , 223 N.J. at 419 , 126 A.3d 850 (finding "it would be unfair, and contrary to our established rules," to decide an issue when the respondent was "deprived of the opportunity to establish a record that might

S.B.K., ETC. VS. HARVEST OF HOPE (L-8102-11, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 14, 2018

Elizabeth Hospital the same year the Legislature established the Fost-Adopt Demonstration Program. … Stated differently, "[a] qualifying organization does not lose its statutory immunity merely because it charges money for its services, unless it makes a profit or collects fees for services totally

State v. Mendez

252 N.J. Super. 155 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 1991

This "rational-basis" test establishes a "low threshold ... for permitting a charge on a lesser included offense." State v. Crisantos, 102 N.J. 265, 278 , 508 A. 2d 167 (1986). … The State called defendant as a witness at Mendieta's trial, which was held subsequent to defendant's trial, and, after he had been granted immunity, attempted to question him.

MOSHE ROZENBLIT VS. MARCIA v. LYLES (C-000002-17, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 21, 2019

The establishment of a sick leave bank must be "agreed upon by the board and the majority representative." … In N.J.S.A. 18A:30-8, the Legislature clearly stated that a school district employee who qualifies as a member of the United States team for athletic competition on the world level "shall be granted a leave of absence with

Spectraserv v. MIDDLESEX UTIL.

416 N.J. Super. 565 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 18, 2010

The statute establishes specific means to effectuate this mandate. Custodians of public records must develop forms for OPRA requests that "provide space for... a brief description of the government record sought." … And although OPRA clearly contemplates the production of such records on an accelerated basis, Spectraserv's demand does not so qualify because, for reasons already stated, it was not authorized by law. III.

Watson v. Agway Ins. Co.

291 N.J. Super. 417 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 1996

Nowhere in the policy does it state that where a natural person is listed as a named insured, the natural person qualifies as "you" for UIM coverage for himself or herself, but is not an "individual" in order to qualify a … To do so fulfills the reasonable expectations of the insureds in the context of the language used in the policy and is consistent with established principles of partnership law. Affirmed.

Matter of Registrant Gb

286 N.J. Super. 396 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 18, 1996

The trial court found counsel to be a capable and experienced attorney who was fully qualified to represent registrant. … where women are cared for, shall qualify, and only those that are `likely to encounter' the offender as discussed in connection with Tier Three[,]" were to be notified.

Graham v. NJ Real Estate Com'n

217 N.J. Super. 130 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1987

The licensing law was designed to place all aspects of the real estate business in the hands of qualified, licensed brokers and salespersons and to exclude the incompetent from the profession in order to protect the public … The amendment to N.J.S.A. 45:15-9 clearly serves that end.

Legge Ind. v. Kushner Hebrew Acad.

333 N.J. Super. 537 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 27, 2000

defined, clearly understandable to the public and the industry, and clearly limited to specified amounts so as to cause the least interruption to construction activities and cash flow; 10. to permit the continued reliance … defined, clearly understandable to the public and the industry, and clearly limited to specified amounts so as to cause the least interruption to construction activities and cash flow; 10. to permit the continued reliance

Little Egg Harbor Tp. v. Bonsangue

316 N.J. Super. 271 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 9, 1998

He clearly stated his factful findings and correlated them with the relevant legal conclusions. Curtis v. Finneran, 83 N.J. 563, 570 , 417 A. 2d 15 (1980). … If a litigant establishes evidence to support a finding of a "reasonable probability" or "likelihood" that the contingencies would be fulfilled, then the contract's relevance and admissibility would be established.

In re Kessler Memorial Hospital

154 N.J. Super. 147 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 14, 1977

Clearly, Kessler’s concern that emergency patients would not receive the immedate attention they need by such staff physicians was not an unfounded one. … When the emergency patient arrives at the emergency room, he needs immediate attention from a qualified physician. Any dela}'’ in the delivery of such services may result in death or other consequences of magnitude.

State v. B.A.

458 N.J. Super. 391 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 22, 2019

"A presumption of validity attaches to every statute"; the burden is on the party challenging the constitutionality of the statute to establish its unconstitutionality. State v. … Thus, this record did not warrant reversal because the comments were not clearly capable of producing an unjust result.

ANTOINETTE MARRA VS. HOPATCONG SENIOR CENTER (L-0250-18, SUSSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 26, 2019

On appeal, defendants argue plaintiff's motion for leave to file a late notice of tort claim should have been denied because she failed to establish extraordinary circumstances in accordance with the New Jersey Tort Claims … The TCA's "guiding principle" is that "immunity from tort liability is the general rule and liability is the exception." Ibid. (quoting D.D., 213 N.J. at 134).

Gautam v. Conte

239 N.J. Super. 362 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 20, 1990

They further ruled that this error was clearly prejudicial and therefore reversed. This Court is satisfied that this error applied to the case against both Defendants. … Moreover, the Hartford court indicated that to allow relief under these facts would undermine the established proposition that a change in the law or a change in the way the judiciary views the law does not qualify as an