Case law

DERICK VEERDEN VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 16, 2021

The ALJ then concluded that there was no evidence of an "unexpected happening" and, thus, appellant failed to establish that the incident that caused his injury was a traumatic event, which is a necessary finding to qualify … To qualify for accidental disability retirement benefits, the petitioner must establish that a traumatic event occurred while the petitioner was performing his or her regular or assigned duties. Id. at 213.

William Asdal v. Chester Township

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 31, 2024

for Right to Farm Act eligibility until the assessor "establishes whether the lots satisfy the Farmland Assessment Act." … But Asdal was not required to prove his claims at the motion to dismiss stage but only to state the causes of action, which he clearly has done. See Printing Mart-Morristown v. Sharp Elecs.

State v. Williams

404 N.J. Super. 147 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 2008

RANDOLPH'S STATEMENT TO POLICE WAS UNRELIABLE AND FAILED TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE CAUSE. B. THE WARRANT AFFIDAVIT FAILED TO ESTABLISH PROBABLE CAUSE. C. … Because, immediately following the declaration of the victim's right, this constitutional provision qualifies the victim's right to be present by declaring that it does not have application "when, prior to completing testimony

J.M. VS. T.F. (FV-12-2253-16, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 17, 2019

Kramer was neither qualified nor offered as an expert witness. … Steven Marcus, who was qualified as an expert in the area of toxicology. Dr.

State v. DeLuzio

274 N.J. Super. 101 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 8, 1993

They have the duty of apprehension of violators and such duties are clearly inherent in the nature of the office. … POINT X THE TRIAL JUDGE COMMITTED REVERSIBLE ERROR AND DEPRIVED DEFENDANTS OF THEIR FEDERAL AND STATE CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS TO DUE PROCESS BY QUALIFYING JAMES R.

Association for Governmental Responsibility, Ethics and Transparency v. Borough of Mantoloking

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 13, 2024

The record clearly demonstrates that the municipal prosecutor waived the privilege. … In sum, a balancing of the Doe factors clearly favors disclosure.

Ferger v. Local 483

94 N.J. Super. 554 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 1967

within the union for the requisite period and that any further efforts on their part would have been futile; that the International Union was not an indispensable party to the proceedings, and that each of the plaintiffs qualified … In Gibbs Justice Brennan clearly stated that the application of the doctrine within the guide lines established both in that decision and Hurn must ultimately resolve itself into a question of judicial discretion, to be weighed

DiMaria Const., Inc. v. Interarch

351 N.J. Super. 558 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 2001

Any error, in this circumstance, to be reversible must amount to plain error, or error that was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 1:7-5. … Judge Chaiet rejected defendants' argument that as agents they shared in Commerce's immunity from tortious interference.

The Estate of James Evans v. Dawn Warner, R.N.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 16, 2025

Helping Hand subsequently objected to the AOMs, arguing neither expert was qualified to assert "direct" claims against Helping Hand. … Plaintiffs contended the AOMs complied with the AMS because they were authored by qualified persons and identified Helping Hand as a potentially liable entity.

Eli Lilly & Co. v. Sav-On Drugs, Inc.

57 N.J. Super. 291 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 29, 1959

It is doubtful that this constitutes a good defense because the bottle which was marked in evidence clearly disclosed that the plaintiff's name and trademark appeared on the label, and defendant was obviously seeking to gain … It has been stated that the effect of the International Shoe Co. case was to establish a rule that, where a foreign corporation is present within the State, the court looks not only to the regularity, continuity and extent

Grato v. Grato

272 N.J. Super. 140 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 6, 1994

Consequently, actions of close corporations that conform with these principles cannot be immune from scrutiny. … Clearly this would no longer be so today. See Brundage v. New Jersey Zinc.

Paley v. Bank of America

420 N.J. Super. 39 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 2011

The history and purposes of Articles 3 and 4 of the UCC is clearly explained by A. Brooke Overby in a 2005 article. … ("We recognize that although a bank has complied with the Code provisions, such compliance does not necessarily immunize it from ordinary tort liability."), certif. denied, 77 N.J. 506 , 391 A. 2d 520 (1978).

Newark v. Dept. of Health of NJ

109 N.J. Super. 166 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 1970

The burden is on petitioner to establish that they do not. Consolidation Coal Company v. Kandle, 105 N.J. Super. 104 (App. Div. 1969), aff'd o.b. 54 N.J. 11 (1969). … It was not a quasi -judicial action and clearly did not require a hearing. Indeed, N.J.S.A. 58:11-4, under which the order was issued, does not require a hearing. Cf. State Board of Milk Control v.

J.B. VS. CAMDEN COUNTY BOARD OF SOCIAL SERVICES (DIVISION OF MEDICAL ASSISTANCE AND HEALTH SERVICES)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 5, 2020

The Director determined petitioner had "offered no corroborating evidence to establish that these transfers were done for a purpose other than to qualify for Medicaid benefits, nor was she ab le to rebut the presumption … The record clearly supports the Director's determination petitioner failed to rebut the presumption. We thus turn to the issue of the penalty. III.

State v. Harris

384 N.J. Super. 29 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 17, 2006

Here, the *22 record establishes neither. For these reasons, we find the inevitable discovery doctrine inapplicable. … The first is firearms, the simple possession of which in the course of committing a CDS crime is sufficient to qualify for criminal culpability.

SUSAN PATIKOWSKI VS. ST. PETER'S UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL (L-3214-17, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 3, 2021

Thus, the issue becomes, is that, alone, enough to establish a valid [NJ]LAD claim. … was terminated from that position; and that (4) the employer sought to, or did fill the position with a similarly-qualified person.

Strougo v. Ocean Shore Holding Co.

457 N.J. Super. 138 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 26, 2017

Adequate Representation Determining adequacy of representation requires that two factors be established: "(a) plaintiff's attorney must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation, and … However, this by itself is not enough to reject the settlement because the other factors cut clearly in favor of settlement. 8.

Supermarkets Gen. Corp. v. Sills

93 N.J. Super. 326 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 8, 1966

(at p. 378) It is equally well established that the burden of a party attacking a statute as unconstitutional is a strong one. … But the second proposition is qualified by limitations which compound the difficulties of one who assails the legislative decision.

Alpha Beauty v. Winn-Dixie Stores

425 N.J. Super. 94 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 3, 2012

Azran made several loans to the Kleinmans to help establish Alpha, in return for which he became the owner of eight percent of Alpha's outstanding shares. … By "successive action," the Rule clearly meant to encompass only actions following the suit in which the Rule 4:5-1(b)(2) violation occurred.

Vail Mut. Assoc. v. Speaker of House

107 N.J. Super. 517 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 2, 1969

The purpose was to qualify for larger state aid. … It clearly appears that the ratio of enrolled pupils to assessed valuations is substantially lower in New Shrewsbury than in Shrewsbury. B.