Case law

State v. D.R.

214 N.J. Super. 278 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 16, 1986

POINT II The sentencing court clearly abused its discretion by imposing a manifestly excessive sentence. … Evid.R. 56(2) permits a qualified expert to give his opinion based upon facts or data which themselves may not be admissible.

Kramer v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.

371 N.J. Super. 580 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 9, 2004

Plaintiffs claimed no actual physical injury but sought to establish a medical monitoring fund to guard against future injury from exposure to chemical contamination emanating from CIBA's Toms River facility. … Under the agreement in question, as Bobsein and McPherson note, no writing "expressly states nor clearly implies that the stated exceptions for `willful misconduct'" was ever "stricken from the Agreement."

Cavallaro v. Jamco Property Mgt.

334 N.J. Super. 557 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 23, 2000

Following oral argument on the motion, Judge Bernhard concluded that plaintiff's mental health treatment records were privileged and that defendant failed to establish under Kinsella v. … The judge also noted that those subpoenas violated R. 4:14-7(b)(2) because each of the doctors qualified as a treating physician, psychologist, or expert and was therefore entitled either to be deposed at his or her residence

State v. Cengiz

241 N.J. Super. 482 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1990

Clearly, N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14 has a related purpose. The Court found that requiring a prosecutor to furnish reasons for his decision furthered accountability by facilitating judicial review. … The Court found that "the prosecutor is not immune from the ban against arbitrariness in *496 governmental decision making." Id. at 377 , 375 A. 2d 607 .

INTERNATIONAL BOTHERHOOD OF ELECTRICAL WORKERS LOCAL 400 VS. BOROUGH OF TINTON FALLS (L-3966-19, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 15, 2021

In essence, the federal enclave doctrine is a defense to certain state law claims. 6 It is well established that the federal district courts have exclusive jurisdiction over the federal government and the Navy as … Without the express consent of the United States Congress, the federal government is immune from suit in a state court. Block v. North Dakota, 461 U.S. 273, 280 (1983).

State v. Bielkiewicz

267 N.J. Super. 520 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 15, 1993

The prosecutor clearly articulated this theory in his opening: Now, ladies and gentlemen, as I have told you, it was one bullet that killed Miguel Gonzalez. It wasn't two. It was one. … Participation and agreement can be established from conduct as well as spoken words.

Estate of Chin v. ST. BARNABAS MED. CENTER

312 N.J. Super. 81 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 27, 1998

To the extent that the court may have erred in this regard we conclude that the error was not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. Dr. Piver testified as an expert against Dr. Goldfarb. … The jury could have found that the nurses were not qualified to work with the equipment; that one of them connected the exhaust line to a suction canister to which the suction tubing was attached; or that one of them left

Jason Sharp v. Board of Trustees, Etc.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 2026

Our Supreme Court in Richardson clarified the meaning of the phrase "result of a traumatic event" in the statute in establishing a five-part test a claimant seeking accidental disability retirement benefits must satisfy … Because 2(b) is clearly applicable here, the Board's final agency decision is reversed, and the Board is directed to award accidental disability retirement benefits to Sharp.

State v. Casele

198 N.J. Super. 462 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 1985

Super. 388, 392-393 (Law Div. 1983), indicated that proof that the blood sample had been obtained in a hospital by qualified medical personnel ordinarily suffices to establish the requirement that the blood was drawn in a … Furthermore, a jury verdict may be set aside only where "having given due regard to the opportunity of the jury to pass upon the credibility of the witnesses, it clearly and convincingly appears that there was a manifest

Stern v. Larocca

49 N.J. Super. 496 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 11, 1958

that the owners be absolutely indemnified in respect to claims or losses "from accidents to any person or persons by or on account of the prosecution of the work" would be frustrated if the obligation were construed to be qualified … by defendants, had the Landolfi action gone to judgment against plaintiffs, the latter would have been entitled to recover nothing against the defendants on the indemnity agreement anyway, as such a judgment would have established

Labov Mechanical, Inc. v. East Coast Power, L.L.C.

377 N.J. Super. 240 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 5, 2005

While the filing of a lien by one subcontractor does not establish a lien fund for a subsequent lien holder, Triple “R” Enters., Inc. v. … It was, regardless of its effective date, similar *251 to the retainage in Legge, which we declined to deduct from the lien fund, a result the Supreme Court clearly agreed with in Craft .

Seacoast Builders Corp. v. Rutgers

358 N.J. Super. 524 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 24, 2003

Though the specifications clearly state that the low bidder is required to survey and test the building, this cannot be done until the contract is awarded. … The one seeking "to overcome the strong presumption of access must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the interest in secrecy outweighs the presumption."

COMM. WORKERS OF AM. v. McCormac

417 N.J. Super. 412 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 5, 2008

TRADE SECRETS Clearly, defendants have established the documents are exempt as proprietary commercial or financial information. Therefore, resolution of whether the documents are trade secrets is not required. … Clearly, that would harm the State's fiduciary interest.

John Paff v. Ocean County Prosecutor's Office

446 N.J. Super. 163 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 2016

In Education Law Center, the Supreme Court discussed a qualified privilege and explained that after the governmental agency had carried its burden of proof to establish the privilege … While the record is based on a summary proceeding, certain material facts are established by the record.

In Re Eleventh Ward Building & Loan Ass'n

130 N.J. Eq. 414 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 19, 1941

This state has asserted such to be its public policy; *426 and so the proffered evidence, so far as it was revealed, would have been clearly immaterial. Vide Bucsi v. Longworth Building and Loan Association, supra. … The provision deals with reserves “heretofore established by the Old Association by assessment charged against members as of March 31st, 1933.”

AMER. CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION v. County of Hudson

352 N.J. Super. 45 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 12, 2002

More importantly, both cases clearly established that movants are, with liberality, to be afforded reasonable *642 opportunities to cure procedural defects in their motions to intervene. … Manifestly, this case qualifies under the first and third exceptions.

New Jersey Division of Youth & Family Services v. V.M.

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. … All references to "child” or "children” in these materials clearly contemplated children-in-being.

In RE 1999-2000 ABBOTT v. Burke Implementing Regulations

348 N.J. Super. 382 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 22, 2002

There shall be a code of conduct that clearly defines acceptable and unacceptable student behaviors and the consequences for them. … and recruitment efforts; and identify all qualified individuals, if any, who applied for the position.

Rogers v. Gordon

404 N.J. Super. 213 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 2008

Clearly, under the Uniform Premarital Agreement Act, passed seven years after the execution of the present ant[e]-nuptial agreement, and remaining in effect. . . require[s] a court of equity to reject those agreements which … "A trial court's interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts are not entitled to any deference, however." Manalapan Realty v. Manalapan Tp.

N.J. Spine Soc'y v. N.J. Small Emp'r Health Benefits Program Bd.

453 N.J. Super. 94 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 31, 2018

In Section 51, the Legislature clearly described what "action" does and does not mean. Because the text of Section 51 is unambiguous, we need not consider extrinsic evidence to discern its meaning. … This includes establishment and modification of standard plans for marketing to small employers and establishing and administering assessment mechanisms.