Case law

Med. Ctr. v. TP. OF PRINCETON ZONING BD. OF ADJ.

343 N.J. Super. 177 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 28, 2001

Clearly, the consideration of location is "a two-edged sword." … A zoning ordinance enjoys a presumption of validity, which may be overcome by a showing that the ordinance is clearly arbitrary, capricious, or unreasonable. Riggs v.

Gauntt Construction Co. v. Delaware River & Bay Authority

241 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 3, 1989

The complaint and its verification failed to disclose the existence of the clearly “contemplated” proceedings before the DRBA Director. … The “arbitration” findings are a nullity because the Director was not qualified to conduct the proceedings.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DAVID J. SILCOTT (14-12-0935, 15-11-1084, and 17-04-0372, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 19, 2019

Therefore, defendant must establish that the judge's charge "qualifies as plain error[.]" State v. R.B., 183 N.J. 308, 321 (2005) (quoting State v. Hock, 54 N.J. 526, 538 (1969)). … The judge found that "[t]hey are clearly separate crimes and separate offenses," and "their objectives were clearly separate, and distinct, and unrelated."

Sprint Spectrum, LP v. BOROUGH OF UPPER SADDLE RIVER ZONING BD.

352 N.J. Super. 575 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 7, 2002

While courts have never clearly defined what constitutes a "significant" gap in coverage, see Ho-Ho-Kus, 197 F. 3d at 70 , a gap which encompasses more than half of a municipality is clearly not de minimus, as defined in … Locating the monopole on a private, residential lot would clearly be more intrusive than placing it at the fire department.

Regina Gensel v. Board of Trustees

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 31, 2025

She recalled the surgery took place in May 2014. 1 The Board also determined petitioner lacked the requisite number of years of service to qualify for ordinary disability retirement benefits. … Our Supreme Court later explained, to establish that an individual has suffered a "traumatic event" within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 43:15A-43, a member of the pension system must demonstrate the following to qualify for

NRG Rema LLC v. Creative Envtl. Solutions Corp.

454 N.J. Super. 578 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 25, 2018

rights that "clearly limited to specified amounts"); N.J. … The record contains no other writing establishing his position.

State v. Molnar

161 N.J. Super. 424 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 1978

Under oath, and provided with immunity, defendant denied ever having received information that Migliaccio might have paid money to obtain reassignment to his former job or any information that any officer at the workhouse … Clearly, there was no official inducement to fail to report Migliaccio's phone call and its contents. Nor was there any inducement to deny, under oath, that it had occurred.

Davis v. New Jersey Dept. of Law

327 N.J. Super. 59 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 7, 1999

Indeed plaintiffs' challenge is limited to the agency's regulation of speech "on matters of public concern" and defendant acknowledges plaintiffs' proposed speech qualifies as such. Dfs. br. at p. 15. … Here, the government's proffered justifications for Regulation 19 have not been as clearly identified as the countervailing interests of the plaintiff employee class.

JOHN DEVLIN VS. SALLY GORSKI (L-2243-15, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 29, 2018

We disagree with plaintiff's contention that Gorski's recommendation for family counseling in her March 16, 2014 letter establishes that plaintiff was Gorski's client/patient. … The judge explained that the October 5, 2013 letter "clearly addressed a matter under a judicial proceeding while Gorski was also clearly a party knowledgeable to testify in that matter had she been called to do so, and

Barbara Poulard v. Lucien Poulard, Jr.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 8, 2024

Before fixing an equitable distribution award, the trial court must first decide which property qualifies as marital property and which property, if any, belongs separately to either spouse. … "[T]he burden of proof to establish the immunity of an asset from [equitable] distribution rests upon the spouse asserting the immunity." Dotsko v. Dotsko, 244 N.J. Super. 668, 676 (App. Div. 1990) (citing Painter v.

G.F.B. VS. SAINT JAMES SCHOOL (L-6697-15, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 24, 2019

The court granted the motion, finding that the counts alleged negligence claims that are barred by the Charitable Immunity Act, see N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-7, and that plaintiffs failed to present sufficient evidence establishing … Div. 1977) (noting that "[o]ur rules clearly impose upon the attorneys for the parties to the appeal the absolute duty to make unnecessary an independent examination of the record by the court").

Gauntt Const. v. RIVER & BAY AUTH.

241 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 3, 1989

The complaint and its verification failed to disclose the existence of the clearly "contemplated" proceedings before the DRBA Director. … The "arbitration" findings are a nullity because the Director was not qualified to conduct the proceedings.

Seneca Insurance Company, Inc., Etc. v. Theophilus O. Charles

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 22, 2025

We conclude the trial court's assessment of the video demands correction for Seneca to establish Keystone was negligent. … The court should have considered whether he qualified as an expert witness under N.J.R.E. 702.

In Re Challenge of Contract Award Solicitation 13-X-22694 Lottery Growth Management Services

436 N.J. Super. 350 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 3, 2014

majority of the votes cast by, the people at a special election or shall hereafter be submitted to, and authorized by a majority of the votes cast thereon by, the legally qualified … Although the Planning Commission's research benefitted from the experience of other states, its report to the Legislature stated that the information it had gathered was "not adequate . . . to define clearly the optimal

State v. One 1990 Ford Thunderbird

371 N.J. Super. 228 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 2004

Rather, in weighing the arguments advanced, the judge was clearly guided by the presumption of validity, but determined that it had been overcome. … The proceeds must be devoted to special law enforcement purposes within defined, narrowly established parameters.

Raso v. Ross Steel Erectors, Inc.

319 N.J. Super. 373 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 12, 1999

Clearly, the petitioner in Squeo would have benefitted from the construction of the apartment, but *696 the Court ruled that the employer or carrier could not be made to pay for the construction until petitioner had satisfied … determining whether Giordano's services conform to Section 15 standards, the Division must address whether, among other things, the arranging and coordination of such care for a patient suffering from catastrophic injuries qualifies

Dcpp v. L.E.F., in the Matter of J.J.N.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 23, 2025

For example, proof that a child is suffering from withdrawal symptoms at birth could establish actual harm. … That information may come from any number of competent sources including medical and hospital records, health care providers, caregivers, or qualified experts.

DANIEL J. O'BRIEN v. NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY (L-5157-18, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 27, 2022

Rule 4:46-2 clearly requires that a motion for summary judgment be supported by a statement of material facts which "cit[es] to the portion of the motion record establishing [each] fact or demonstrating that [each fact] … Finally, plaintiff argues that the record established genuine and material factual issues regarding each element required to establish liability under the TCA.

James G. Lowe, M.D. v. Bernard Audet

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 24, 2025

Further, the Shaw panel was "unpersuaded that the Legislature acquiesced in all semi-professional CFA immunity." Id. at 619. … Court Rules, cmt. 3.3 on R. 1:36-3 (2025) (noting this court's "opinions clearly are binding on all [trial] courts" but do not bind "other panels of the Appellate Division").

Hennessey v. Coastal Eagle Point Oil Co.

247 N.J. Super. 297 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 1991

The Court held that this allegation, if true, would constitute a violation of the public policy established by the Legislature when it adopted New Jersey's Law Against Discrimination. … GLO:cr Attachment NOTES [1] Governmental action clearly was involved in the customs officials case because the federal government was the employer.