Case law

Reisdorf v. Mayor & Council of Borough of Mountainside

114 N.J. Super. 562 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1971

L. 445, the (former) Supreme Court was called upon to review two ordinances establishing street grade lines. … There is no proof that any qualified voter has been or will be deprived of his right to vote, or that anyone who is not entitled to vote will be permitted to vote as a result of the realignment.

In Re Mrs. M

74 N.J. Super. 178 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 1962

Such a purpose, clearly manifested, certainly forms a more reasonable ground for permitting judicial discretion to decide whether another may assume these claims and duties, than does the signature of the parent, which a … Their position in life, socially and financially, affords no immunity to possible dire consequences." So here.

State v. Rosenberg

144 N.J. Super. 326 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 1976

In Miller the Supreme Court abandoned the requirement established earlier in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413 , 86 S. Ct. 975 , 16 L. … [I] had not considered at least some of the additional points raised by defendants herein, although clearly the court there placed a “limiting construction” on the statute.

State v. DIORIO

422 N.J. Super. 445 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 20, 2011

THE AFFIDAVITS AND TESTIMONY OF [DEFENDANT AND HIS ATTORNEY] ESTABLISH CLEARLY AND CONVINCINGLY THAT THE STATE AND DEFENDANT HAD AGREED TO THE TERMS OF A NEGOTIATED PLEA PRIOR TO THE JANUARY 9, 2002 PROFFER SESSION. B. … At a Kastigar hearing, the State "has the burden of establishing that its *361 evidence is not tainted by information derived from immunized testimony. " State v.

OCEAN COUNTY CELLULAR TELE. CO. v. Tp. of Lakewood Bd. of Adjustment

352 N.J. Super. 514 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 3, 2002

The positive criteria require that "special reasons" for granting the variance be established. Sica, supra, 127 N.J. at 156 , 603 A. 2d 30 . … Indeed, during the hearings Board members found Comcast's witnesses to be highly qualified.

Cutler v. Borough of Westwood

295 N.J. Super. 344 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 1996

The language only clearly and unambiguously supports Cutler's reading if we ignore the subordinate clause completely. … is automatically acquired by everyone at the first moment of work in the fifth consecutive year, then tenure would always be acquired " on ... the commencement" of the fifth year and there would be no one left who could qualify

Trustees of the Local 478 Trucking & Allied Industries Pension Fund v. Pirozzi

198 N.J. Super. 297 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 22, 1983

Having established the requisite duty, there was no question that there had been a breach. … The court further qualified the Willy standard by imposing a requirement that the cause of action arising from the duty be one nonexistent at common law.

Chemical Bank New York Trust Co. v. Kingsley

101 N.J. Super. 77 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 22, 1968

A domicile once established continues until it is superseded by a new one. … Pursuant to the authority and the duty thus cast upon him to provide for his ward’s person and property, he duly qualified as guardian.

Belmont Condominium Ass'n v. Geibel

432 N.J. Super. 52 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 9, 2013

Any changes made to the building should have been inspected, detailed and supervised by qualified professionals. … It is thus clearly implied that interest on the loss suffered by a plaintiff as a result of defendant’s tortious conduct is what was contemplated by the rule. ...

County of Warren v. State

409 N.J. Super. 495 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 4, 2009

With respect to that issue, there were clearly no factual disputes, so we are dealing with a question of law only. … But the second proposition is qualified by limitations which compound the difficulties of one who assails the legislative decision.

Best v. C & M Door Controls, Inc.

402 N.J. Super. 229 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 19, 2008

A favorable determination qualifying for allowances under this rule is a verdict or determination at least as favorable to the offeror as the offer or, if a money judgment, is in an amount, excluding allowable prejudgment … City of Hoboken, 196 N.J. 51, 79 , 951 A. 2d 1017 (2008) (defining a prevailing party as "a party who can establish a `causal nexus' between the litigation" and an ultimately favorable result).

Oceanside Charter School v. New Jersey State Department of Education

418 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 14, 2011

The grant solicitations clearly stated that new construction was not to be undertaken with the funds, but petitioner applied for same, knowing that they would be used for the design and construction of buildings and facilities … Otherwise each district would have a “free pass to award contracts, disregard the express language of the PSCL, and claim immunity from having to repay the amount improperly expended.”

Ferguson v. Rippel

23 N.J. Super. 132 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 21, 1952

Rippel and the National State Bank of Newark, are the duly qualified executors of the estate. … . *135 The intervention of the court was sought because of a controversy arising out of the 35th article of the will under which the foundation is established.

Golaine v. Cardinale

142 N.J. Super. 385 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 18, 1976

the holder of a public office during his term, nevertheless, and based upon the general theory that an office holder accepts his office on the implied condition of his faithful execution of its obligations, it is a well established … And see, N.J.S.A. 2A:81-17.2a1 (every public employee removable for failure to testify on a grant of use immunity). And cf.

State v. Elysee

159 N.J. Super. 380 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 12, 1978

She was fully qualified with respect to knowledge of Creole, French and English, and conducted the translation in Creole which admittedly is the language spoken and understood by defendant. … The State has borne the burden cast upon it to establish the voluntariness of the statement, the communication of Miranda warnings and the understanding waiver by defendant.

Kopitnikoff v. Lowenstein Bros., Inc.

24 N.J. Super. 434 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 10, 1953

Ruoff, asserted that Kopitnikoff "clearly did not comprehend what was going on" and that his condition would not improve but "will retrogress." … However, the deputy director decided that such *440 an accident had been established by other proof in the case.

Ric-Cic Co. v. Bassinder

252 N.J. Super. 334 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 1991

Bassinder's interest, we hold that the language of perpetual grant and the lump sum compensation receivable in exchange imply that he received something which clearly qualifies as an "interest in ... land" within the meaning … Any other arguments on appeal which have not been expressly disposed of are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Rosenberg v. State

396 N.J. Super. 565 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 30, 2007

He asserts that a modified plea bargain was eventually approved, wherein the parties pled guilty to certain tax offenses and were immunized from criminal prosecution for offenses relating to the appointment of the Palmyra … After establishing the requisite interest in the subject matter, a party “seeking access ... must ‘establish that the balance of its interest in disclosure against the public interest in maintaining confidentiality weighs

Dyfs v. Vm

408 N.J. Super. 222 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 16, 2009

As a result, the judge ordered that a psychiatrist be appointed who would have the same immunity as the court. At the March 19, 2007 permanency hearing, J.M.G.' … s refusal to consent to invasive procedures clearly was a major consideration in his decision.

Bayway Refining v. State Util.

333 N.J. Super. 420 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 25, 2000

that clearly contemplated ongoing activity in New Jersey. … Those restrictions are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation. They are a consequence of territorial limitations on the power of the respective States.