Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.37s
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.
Cited 0 timesPublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 16, 2026
The United States Supreme Court's ruling in Keffeler II clearly indicates that the Division's reimbursement policy is not preempted by federal law. … However, that federal "rational basis" approach is qualified by what are known as "tiered" levels of scrutiny.
Cited 0 timesPublishedGlobal American Ins. Managers v. Perera Co.
137 N.J. Super. 377 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 3, 1975
In Seabrook Farms, for example, the broker received the premiums even before establishing any contact whatever with the insurer. … of its enactment: It is declared that the purposes of the surplus lines law are to provide orderly access for the insuring public of New Jersey to insurers not authorized to transact insurance in this State, through only qualified
Cited 15 timesPublished123 N.J. Super. 14 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 23, 1973
He has submitted an affidavit to establish that he was a "party" to several of the telephone calls intercepted on December 20, 1971. … He does not qualify as a "party" to any of those intercepted conversations, nor is there any evidence to indicate that he is a person "against whom" those interceptions were directed.
Cited 13 timesPublishedPrime Property & Casualty Insurance, Inc. v. Nv Service Inc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 3, 2026
Prime's policy clearly contained omnibus provisions, such as the Approved Driver Endorsement, which covered permissive users, like Mendoza- Bastidas. … This provision clearly gave notice Mendoza-Bastidas was covered, but only to the statutory minimums. It did not violate public policy. Our obligation is to enforce the clearly worded policy as written.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. WALTER A. TORMASI (97-04-0234, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 13, 2021
Bass, we addressed the type of sentence that may qualify as a de facto life term. 457 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div. 2018), certif. denied, 238 N.J. 364 (2019). … Moreover, "[t]he granting of parole is within the discretion of the Board, and we must give great deference to the expertise of the Board in its parole decisions and not upset them unless it clearly and convincingly appears
Cited 0 timesPublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. WALTER A. TORMASI (97-04-0234, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 13, 2021
Bass, we addressed the type of sentence that may qualify as a de facto life term. 457 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div. 2018), certif. denied, 238 N.J. 364 (2019). … Moreover, "[t]he granting of parole is within the discretion of the Board, and we must give great deference to the expertise of the Board in its parole decisions and not upset them unless it clearly and convincingly appears
Cited 0 timesPublishedMARVIN ESCOBAR-BARRERA VS. PAUL KISSIN (L-0783-17. UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 2020
Pomerantz, who was qualified as an expert in radiology, testified that based on his review of plaintiff's MRI, plaintiff sustained "a large tear" of "the supraspinatus tendon" in his right shoulder. After Dr. … A denial of a mistrial in such a situation would be a mistaken exercise of judicial discretion, and hence harmful error since such action by the court would clearly and unequivocally
Cited 0 timesPublished101 N.J. Super. 539 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 1968
Since no objection was made to the charge, as required by R.R. 3:7-7(b), no basis for appellate review exists unless the alleged error in the charge qualifies as plain error. R.R. 1:5-1( a ); State v. … Although the opinion speaks in terms of the unconstitutionality of any "construction" of the statute which would sustain a conviction under the facts established ( 93 N.J.
Cited 3 timesPublishedNew Jersey Division of Youth & Family Services v. L.J.D.
428 N.J. Super. 451 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 17, 2012
Before addressing the issues presented by Lela, we outline the well-established guidelines governing our review. … Singer concluded, “This child clearly requires consistency and permanency.
Cited 119 timesPublished415 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 30, 2010
These claims were clearly related to Raub's farming operations. … To achieve this purpose, the Legislature has immunized commercial farms from nuisance suits if they are using generally accepted agricultural practices.
Cited 12 timesPublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 4, 2018
Therefore, to qualify under subsection one, Dr. … Vearrier qualifies under subsection two as an expert on standard of care.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSOMERVILLE, ETC., SALES, INC. v. General Metal Corp.
39 N.J. Super. 348 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 28, 1956
Having in mind that the jury had no qualifying instructions in respect to what guide it should follow in ascertaining the extent to which it might allow the supposed liability over to Heineken's in estimating plaintiff's … But it was clearly appropriate and necessary, since the issue was raised, for the court to satisfy itself from the evidence as to whether the claim of the subvendee was well-founded as a matter of law. Cf.
Modified by Somerville Container Sales, Inc. v. General Metal Corp., 39 N.J. Super. 562 (1956)Cited 7 timesPublished48 N.J. Eq. 566 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 1891
The burden is upon the respondents to clearly establish the truth of this proposition. The presumption of law is in favor of capacity. … I cannot but conclude that he has-given a single expression, in a conversation that may have qualified that expression.
Cited 6 timesPublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. B.A. (13-08-2454, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 22, 2019
"A presumption of validity attaches to every statute"; the burden is on the party challenging the constitutionality of the statute to establish its unconstitutionality. State v. Lenihan, 219 N.J. 251, 266 (2014). … With respect to speech "integral to criminal conduct," the "immunity" of the First Amendment will not extend to "a single and integrated course of conduct" that violates a valid criminal statute.
Cited 0 timesPublishedNew Jersey Transit PBA Local 304 v. New Jersey Transit Corp.
384 N.J. Super. 512 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 12, 2006
Specifically, a who, what, where, when, why and how standard for disclosure must be established by [NJT]. … Clearly, an officer’s ability to perform his or her job safely depends on being physically capable of performing [his or her] duties.
Cited 2 timesPublished74 N.J. Super. 381 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 1962
It is asserted that the evidence adduced at the trial conclusively established the decedent to have been contributorily negligent as a matter of law. … The defendant subsequently produced testimony from an equally qualified expert that the crossing protection furnished conformed to applicable standards.
Cited 21 timesPublishedBARBARA A. DAVIS VS. EDGAR K. DAVIS (FM-08-0719-16, GLOUCESTER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 23, 2019
Davis' inheritance was immune from equitable distribution and when it found plaintiff's testimony was more credible than his. … Plaintiff was "clearly more successful" with regard to the results obtained.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 2020
Both witnesses were previously qualified as experts in several other commitment hearings. … Adequate, substantial and credible evidence in this record supported the judge's conclusion that the State clearly and convincingly proved J.D. should remain committed.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIn Re Reorganization of Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange of New Jersey
328 N.J. Super. 344 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 14, 2000
MIIX was established in 1977 under the auspices of MSNJ as a reciprocal insurance exchange authorized by N.J.S.A. 17:50-1 to -19. … Significantly, he found "that the proposed plan of distribution is clearly reasonable and equitable."
Cited 7 timesPublished
Ask Donna