Case law

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.

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).

Howard Sav. Inst. v. TRUSTEES, AMHERST COLLEGE

61 N.J. Super. 119 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 14, 1960

establishes that neither defendant, now comprising Kinfolk, was a desirable beneficiary party. … Amherst was shown to be non-sectarian, and the resolution of Amherst clearly belies any other disposition.

Congiusti v. Ingersoll-Rand Co.

306 N.J. Super. 126 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 1997

Kurt stated clearly that an operator would be safer on the ground than on a platform. … It may be a defendant who has already settled, a coemployee, a statutorily-immune party, or, as here, a plaintiff benefitting from the Suter contributory negligence holding.

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.

THERESA TRIOLA VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 26, 2021

The burden to establish pension eligibility is on the applicant, not the Board. Patterson v. Bd. of Trs., State Police Ret. Sys., 194 N.J. 29, 50-51 (2008). … "[T]he creation of legislation is an essential function of the Legislature, so that sovereign immunity bars the equitable estoppel claim." Berg, 225 N.J. at 280.

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.

State v. J.G.

402 N.J. Super. 290 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 2008

Defendant asked Brown “to counsel” him but Brown declined because he was too angry with defendant and defendant “needed real psychological help which [Brown] was not qualified to give.” … Clearly, the conversations between defendant and Brown are not protected by the privilege. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

ST. JOHN'S GREEK CATHOLIC CHURCH v. Fedak

89 N.J. Super. 65 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 30, 1965

He called attention to the fact that five of the officers were not qualified for office under the Metropolia statutes. … Clearly, from the testimony adduced, it appears that the Metropolia is a hierarchically structured church.

Bernetich, Hatzell & Pascu, LLC, Etc. v. Medical

445 N.J. Super. 173 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 22, 2016

MRO also contends that the invoice is neither a consumer contract nor subject to the stringent standards established in Atalese; and it clearly informed BH&P that disputes over the invoice must be arbitrated. … Under state and federal law, a patient has a qualified right to inspect or obtain copies of his or her medical records.

Hornberger v. American Broadcasting Cos., Inc.

351 N.J. Super. 577 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 2002

The Court established an *581 exception to this probable-cause requirement in Terry v. … Buckelew farmed some 4,000 acres (and was the first in the area to use marl on his land), supplied 700 mules for the Delaware and Raritan Canal, established the Freehold and Jamesburg Agricultural Railroad, and helped establish

Vas v. Roberts

418 N.J. Super. 509 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 2011

The compensation herein provided shall be paid to each member upon his qualifying into office as such member . . . . [ N.J.S.A. 52:10A-1 (emphasis added).] … To this end, the Assembly has established by rule a procedure for sanctioning members that requires the establishment by resolution of a six-member committee to serve charges and administer a hearing before reporting its

Spiegle v. Seaman

160 N.J. Super. 471 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1978

The trial judge found plaintiff sufficiently qualified to testify to the title examination he had made on the basis of plaintiff's explanation of his prior experience in the searching of titles. … This, however, was contrary to long-established decisional law on the subject.

State v. Jefimowicz

230 N.J. Super. 42 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 17, 1989

Martin, 110 N.J. 10 (1988), in which the Chief Justice made clear the right of a defendant facing a mandatory extended Graves Act term not only to notice of that susceptibility but *50 also to a hearing to establish the existence … We have belabored these facts to illustrate that while defendant's crime clearly requires punishment in the form of a prison term and a mandatory ineligibility period, it does not justify, in the circumstances, the absolute

Chamber of Commerce E. Union Cty. v. Leone

141 N.J. Super. 114 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 12, 1976

N.J.S.A. 43:15A-139 allows a legislator with at least eight years service who otherwise qualifies to select among various options as to the method of receipt of pension benefits. … One of the purposes of a retirement system is an inducement *134 which will enable the government to secure and retain a more qualified government personnel.

State v. RT

411 N.J. Super. 35 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 16, 2009

This evidence would be entirely insufficient to establish the extremely high level of intoxication required by the Court to qualify as a defense as well as to create a jury question on defendant's intoxication. … The "clearly indicated" standard employed can be traced to dicta in State v.

Arora Petroleum 2, LLC v. Avin Petroleum LLC

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 2026

Defendants' reasons for missing the filing deadline reflect a "lack of proper diligence" which our Supreme Court has clearly stated is insufficient to establish extraordinary circumstances. … A-1706-24 12 issued, clearly informed defendants of the thirty-day deadline and the requirement of a filing fee.

Dixon v. Rutgers

215 N.J. Super. 333 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 1987

It is urged that a qualified academic freedom privilege should be invoked to preclude the evidentiary use of the confidential material, as such protection would support the peer review system for faculty promotion and tenure … R. 34 against disclosing official information of the State is clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E).

Port of NY Auth. v. Public Service, Etc., Co.

76 N.J. Super. 359 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 1, 1962

It would seem that in all justice such Authorities should generally not be afforded the highly special immunities of the State acting in its sovereign capacity * * *." … (at p. 470) *366 Justice Jacobs was referring to the New Jersey Highway Authority, and his frame of reference was to the prerogative of sovereign immunity.

LOCAL 195, IFPTE, AFL-CIO v. State

176 N.J. Super. 85 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 1980

The board, in seeking the best qualified candidates for promotions, should not be restricted in its search to the faculty of *93 the North Bergen schools. … Clearly, this case presents the classic conflict described in Woodstown-Pilesgrove, etc., Bd. of Ed. v. Woodstown-Pilesgrove Regional Ed.