Case law

Noble v. CHAIRMAN AND TP. COMMITTEE OF MENDHAM TP.

91 N.J. Super. 111 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 26, 1966

NOBLE, HIS WIFE, PLAINTIFFS-APPELLANTS, v. … Hohl v. Readington Tp., 37 N.J. 271, 279 (1962); Tice v. Borough of Woodcliffe Lake, 12 N.J. Super. 20, 25 ( App. Div. 1951).

Mallamaci v. Dietz

146 N.J. Super. 15 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 21, 1976

At the outset we observe that the Parole Board has been granted broad discretionary powers. See N.J.S.A. 30:4-123 et seq. However, any action of the Board is always judicially reviewable for arbitrariness. Monks v. N.J. … NOTES [1] For background on the offenses involved see State v. Zicarelli, 122 N.J. Super. 225 (App. Div. 1973), certif. den. 62 N.J. 429 (1973), and State v. Louf, 126 N.J. Super. 321 (App.

MARGI BOUTRS v. BOARD OF REVIEW (DEPARTMENT OF LABOR)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 27, 2022

A-3037-20 MARGI BOUTRS, Appellant, v. … Bay Drywall, LLC v. Dep't of Lab.

Paramus Multiplex Corp. v. Hartz Mtn. Ind., Inc.

236 N.J. Super. 104 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 16, 1989

Jersey, Inc. v. Tp. of Berlin, supra and Walker v. Stanhope, supra . … Were the actions of the planning board based rationally on the testimony before them? The actions of the board must have a rational basis in fact. Bayshore Sew. Co. v. Dept. of Env., N.J., 122 N.J.

Osoria v. New York Rent Cont. Bd.

410 N.J. Super. 437 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 2009

Management Co. v. … Local boards, however, are permitted to conduct site inspections, in addition to relying on their general knowledge of local conditions. Giordano v. City Comm'n of Newark, 2 N.J. 585, 588 , 67 A. 2d 454 (1949); Smith v.

Manchester Tp. Bd. of Ed. v. Thomas P. Carney, Inc.

199 N.J. Super. 266 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 5, 1985

Super. 266 (1985) 489 A.2d 682 MANCHESTER TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT-CROSS-APPELLANT, v. THOMAS P. … . & A. 1936); McKeeby *278 v. Arthur, 7 N.J. 174 (1951). We do not find that the authorities cited by the Board stand for that proposition as contended by the Board. As noted in McKeeby v.

Burcam Corp. v. Planning Bd. Tp. of Medford

168 N.J. Super. 508 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 29, 1979

Super. 508 (1979) 403 A.2d 921 BURCAM CORPORATION, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. PLANNING BOARD OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MEDFORD; TOWNSHIP COMMITTEE OF THE TOWNSHIP OF MEDFORD, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. … Morris v. Postma, 41 N.J. 354 , 362 (1964); Allendale Congregation of Jehovah's Witnesses v. Grosman, 30 N.J. 273, 277 (1959), app. dism. 361 U.S. 536 , 80 S.Ct. 587 , 4 L.Ed. 2d 538 (1960); Hill Homeowners Ass'n v.

Cumberland Cty. Welfare Bd. v. Rodriquez

144 N.J. Super. 365 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 4, 1976

CUMBERLAND COUNTY WELFARE BOARD, A NEW JERSEY CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF, v. GEORGE H. … In Francis v.

Millman v. Kelly

171 N.J. Super. 589 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 25, 1979

Axtell v. Caputo, 85 N.J. Super. 80 (App.Div.1964). … Wene v. Meyner, supra; Sharrock v. Keansburg, supra; A. G. v. Belleville, 81 N.J.L. 200 (Sup.Ct.1911).

Gunthner v. Planning Bd. of Bay Head

335 N.J. Super. 452 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 28, 2000

In Griggs v. … Zell v.

Kryscnski v. Shenkin

53 N.J. Super. 590 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 29, 1959

Substantially similar situations were presented in Ardolino v. Florham Park Board of Adjustment, 24 N.J. 94 (1957), reversing 41 N.J. Super. 582 ( App. Div. 1956); Rodee v. Lee, 14 N.J. … The same argument was made in Burke v. Spring Lake Board of Adjustment, recently decided by this court, 52 N.J.

Lubliner v. Bd. of Alcoholic Bev. Con., Paterson

59 N.J. Super. 419 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 1960

Russell v. Board of Adjustment of Tenafly, supra, 31 N.J., at page 67 ; Hudson Bergen County Retail Liquor Stores Ass'n v. Board of Com'rs. of City of Hoboken, 135 N.J.L. 502, 511 ( E. & A. 1947); Fanwood v. … Passarella v. Board of Comm., 1 N.J. Super. 313 ( App. Div. 1949).

Dzwonar v. McDevitt

348 N.J. Super. 164 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 15, 2002

In Romaine v. … See also Farmer v.

State v. Maples

346 N.J. Super. 408 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 10, 2002

She then noticed a crumpled brown paper bag, open at the top. … In Griffin v.

Matter of Hill

241 N.J. Super. 367 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 31, 1990

See R. 1:3-4(b); Cabrera v. Tronolone, 205 N.J. Super. 268, 271 , 500 A. 2d 755 (App.Div. *371 1985), certif. den. 103 N.J. 493 , 511 A. 2d 666 (1986). … Alberti v. Civil Service Comm'n., 41 N.J. 147, 154 , 195 A. 2d 297 (1963); see also Calcaterra v. Calcaterra, 206 N.J. Super. 398, 402-403 , 502 A. 2d 1180 (App.Div. 1986). The appeal is therefore dismissed as untimely.

Advance Electric Co., Inc. v. MONTGOMERY TP. BD. OF EDN.

351 N.J. Super. 160 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 2002

In Statewide Hi-Way Safety, Inc. v. … Inc. v.

Parker v. Niagara Fire Ins. Co.

30 N.J. Super. 585 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 28, 1953

Ct. 1947); Hemel v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 211 La. 95 , 29 So. 2 d 483 ( Sup. Ct. 1947); Atlas Assur. Co. v. Lies, 70 Ga. App. 162 , 27 S.E. 2 d 791 ( Ct. App. 1943); Kirkley v. Merrimack Mut. Fire Ins. … Durback v. Fidelity & Guaranty Ins. Corp., supra.

Morgan v. Bd. of Review, Div. of Employ. SEC.

77 N.J. Super. 209 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 19, 1962

Spatola v. Board of Review, 72 N.J. Super. 483, 484-485 ( App. Div. 1962); Marczi v. Board of Review, 63 N.J. Super. 75, 83-84 ( App. Div. 1960). … Mayo v. Unemployment Compensation *214 Board of Review, 196 Pa. Super. 573 , 176 A. 2 d 159 ( Sup. Ct. 1961). See also Krauss v. A. & M. Karagheusian, supra, 13 N.J., at p. 458 .

DiBlasi v. Bd. of Trustees

315 N.J. Super. 298 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 1998

The Board concluded the event was not "involuntary" under Kane v. … See, e.g., Ciecwisz v. Board of Trustees, Police & Firemen's Retirement Sys., 113 N.J. 180, 182 , 549 A. 2d 1218 (1988); Maynard v.

Scerbo v. Bd. of Adjustment of City of Orange

121 N.J. Super. 378 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 30, 1972

BRENNAN, PLAINTIFFS, v. … See Healy v. Board of Appeals of Watertown, 356 Mass. 130 , 248 N.E. 2d 1 ( Sup. Jud. Ct. *390 1969), and Carson v. Board of Appeals of Lexington, 321 Mass. 649 , 75 N.E. 2d 116 ( Sup. Jud. Ct. 1947).