Case law

ALEXANDER FERRIS VS. AIDA BLANCO-ALQUACIL (L-0274-16, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 17, 2019

It furnished a report from a purported crash reconstruction expert who opined that the crosswalk and intersection were not a dangerous condition, since the crosswalk was clearly marked with a streetlight above.2 Plaintiff … Div. 2008) ("When both liability and immunity exist, immunity prevails.") (citing N.J.S.A. 59:2-1).

State v. Merola

365 N.J. Super. 203 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 15, 2002

Ignorance of the law and rules of court does not qualify as excusable neglect. State v. … Neither does defendant's purported low IQ or inability to speak or read English qualify. See State v.

Brenda Zadjeika v. Nj American Water

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 2026

The motion judge next determined that HSTC was immune under N.J.S.A. 59:4-10. … The doctrine is clearly implicated here.

Emmer v. Merin

233 N.J. Super. 568 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 7, 1989

This limitation was clearly intended to counter the increased premium costs which would result from no-fault insurance. Iavicoli, supra, at 123-25. … That the Legislature saw fit to immunize the carriers, we view as nothing more than an effort to forestall another body of litigation in an already overburdened court system.

State v. Brady

332 N.J. Super. 445 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 2000

Dissemination of child pornography over the Internet is clearly a delivery or transfer under the statute. A reasonable person of ordinary intelligence would have understood that such conduct was prohibited. … In light of our determination that .JPG files qualify as "photographs" under the child endangerment statute we find that the prosecutor did not improperly charge the grand jury as to the presumption. Reversed.

Inganamort v. Bor. of Fort Lee

120 N.J. Super. 286 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 1972

The Mayor shall appoint a qualified person to this board at his sole discretion. … Thus, state preemption clearly existed in Wagner.

Stanley Co. of America v. Hercules Powder Co.

29 N.J. Super. 545 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 18, 1954

The criticism is that there was no single explosion of 30,000 pounds of nitroglycerin, because appellant's proof established three successive explosions separated by "about a minute" and a second. … Putting aside the evidence of a single blast adduced by respondent and now referred to by it, the hypothetical question clearly mentions three explosions and the pounds of nitroglycerin involved in each one.

State v. Maxey

77 N.J. Super. 397 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 21, 1962

In Ex parte Pedrini, the California Supreme Court said: "* * * petitioner urges us to declare as law of the state, * * * that once a defendant is sentenced to life imprisonment he is immune from punishment for a further crime … The sentences are clearly provided for in the statute. Yet, on the theory here advanced, it is an impossible sentence. The defendant cannot serve longer than life.

In Re Estate of Sasson

387 N.J. Super. 459 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 16, 2006

Sasson qualified as administrator of John's estate, later valued at about $1.1 million. Included was a townhouse titled in John's sole name at 21 Ridgewood Drive in Randolph, where he lived with Emily Springer. … Clearly the amount she received was insufficient to support her for life. Sasson left Springer an IRA worth nearly $150,000, and she has assets of her own.

Juliano & Sons Enterprises, Inc. v. Chevron, USA, Inc.

250 N.J. Super. 148 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 19, 1991

Moreover, the trial judge held that, unlike in Mazzeo , the parties here, each represented by counsel, clearly expressed their intent in the contract "that this agreement was to last forever." … Section 1(a)(2) of the New Jersey Act establishes the "wait and see" rule by providing that an interest would be valid so long as it does not remain unvested for more than 90 years.

Shamrock Lacrosse v. Klehr & Ellers

416 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 14, 2010

Consequently, the law firm was not qualified to practice law in New Jersey and the affidavit of merit statute should not apply. Id. at 348 . … To be sure, individual attorneys admitted to the New Jersey bar are clearly embraced by the affidavit of merit statute by virtue of the definition in N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-26(c).

JOHN SMITH VS. ARVIND R. DATLA, M.D.(L-1527-15, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

451 N.J. Super. 82 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 12, 2017

"AIDS" means acquired immune deficiency syndrome. Ibid. … (medical records clearly within constitutional sphere of right to privacy), cert. denied, 483 U.S. 1007, 107 S. Ct. 3233, 87 L. Ed. 2d 739 (1987).

Johnson v. Bradbury

233 N.J. Super. 129 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 17, 1989

She states that after she moved to New Jersey he "encouraged me to move to Florida to establish a residency in that State to reduce the cost of tuition." … It concluded that the circumstances of the case clearly rendered "unreasonable" California's exercise of personal jurisdiction.

State of New Jersey v. Wasan Brockington

439 N.J. Super. 311 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 18, 2015

And I just want to establish this for the jury. … The evidence here is clearly relevant to material facts at issue in the determination of defendant's guilt on the charged offenses.

DIV. OF MOTOR VEHICLES v. Caruso

291 N.J. Super. 430 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 1996

Rather, it established new remedies for the collection of surcharges. … We conclude those arguments are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). See Clark v. N.J. Div. Motor Vehicles, 211 N.J.

Bartley Healthcare, Inc. v. Robert Ott

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 15, 2025

Plaintiff claims the penalty arose from non-qualified transfers of funds in the amount of $9,762.45 and, because of this penalty, Medicaid refused to cover services rendered to Ott from February 1, 2020 through February … Our capacity to resolve appeals is a direct function of the trial court's adherence to its obligation to clearly state findings of fact and conclusions of law pursuant to Rule 1:7-4(a).

Borough of Milford v. Arnold

382 N.J. Super. 83 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 26, 2005

Avenue and established a sewer connection ordinance on July 7,1969. … They may have felt the Borough owned something, but were not sure what, and thus could not qualify Railroad Avenue as a full street for zoning purposes.

Service Armament Co. v. Hyland

131 N.J. Super. 38 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 11, 1974

The "1851 Navy" revolvers manufactured between 1851 and 1873 would certainly qualify as "antique firearms" within the statutory exemption, and there is a sound basis to infer that the identical revolvers presently *48 being … As we have pointed out above, resort to the well recognized principle of statutory construction was clearly justified from the ambiguity in the term "antique firearms."

Agisim v. TILLOU REALTY CO., INC.

56 N.J. Super. 18 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 13, 1959

Marsha desires upon completion of high school this year to take a special course of training to qualify as a medical or dental assistant, the cost of which for one year will be $500, besides books and other materials. … Thus, the legislative purpose to permit husbands and wives to convey to each other, in order to extinguish their respective rights and to release their curtesy and dower to each other, is established.

State of New Jersey v. Rolando Terrell

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 29, 2017

The record does not adequately establish the cause. … Their cumulative effect clearly did so.