Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.84s
257 N.J. Super. 483 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 19, 1992
I am, therefore, not at all convinced that Belton does establish the bright-line rule enunciated by the majority. … I am convinced that this is clearly so if the violation is not one of the serious offenses enumerated by the Uniform Vehicle Code.
Cited 1 timesPublishedMirza M. Bulur v. the New Jersey Office of the Attorney General
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 18, 2024
The terms "superseding" and "superseded," in the context of Ch. 94, establish the duration during which Abbassi may serve as OIC without the requisite certifications. … However, these cases clearly distinguish the AG's supervisory authority from their supersession authority. Constantine, 406 N.J.
Cited 0 timesPublishedNew Jersey Division of Youth & Family Services v. M.R.
314 N.J. Super. 390 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 1998
there are disputed adjudicative facts, when the party is entitled to de novo administrative or judicial review, when some urgency requires temporary action pending hearing, or when the advantages of a trial-type hearing clearly … it was uncertain whether appellant would have been allowed access to the documents under the existing statutes and regulations (aside from fundamental *415 fairness and due process considerations) as she would not have qualified
Cited 30 timesPublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 22, 2018
Singer, who was qualified as an expert in psychology, parenting and bonding; Nelson, who qualified as an expert in family counseling; and Dr. … T.U.B. is factually distinguishable and since the evidence unrelated to Joe's sexual abuse that clearly and convincingly established that termination of Natalie's parental rights was in the children's best interest, we
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNoe Perez v. Board of Trustees, Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 2024
Once there, he saw the "suspect [was] clearly . . . under the influence of 'wet.'" Perez questioned other officers as to why the suspect had not yet been apprehended. … Under the Richardson standard, in order to qualify for ADRB, an applicant must prove: 1.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 25, 2020
"N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14 does not establish and indeed does not even mention Drug Courts." Meyer, 192 N.J. at 428. … By Amending N.J.S.A. 2C:35-14 To Clearly Indicate That the Statutory Bars Of [N.J.S.A.] 2C:35-14 Do Not Apply To Track Two.
Cited 0 timesPublishedERICK ESTIL VS. NEW JERSEY TRANSIT BUS OPERATIONS, INC. (L-0690-20, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 2021
NJT called six witnesses including Dale Sulpy, its senior safety director, and Steven Schorr, who was qualified by the panel as an expert in accident reconstruction. … Noting Sherlock testified at the hearing, the judge found "clearly this [wa]s not the case where testimony was precluded."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSylvia Melania Tejada De Tapia v. 74 Industries, Inc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 12, 2024
The court found plaintiff's fourth amended complaint had pleaded causes of action for intentional wrongs, and that "Part Two of the Policy clearly and unambiguously excludes intentional wrongs from insurance coverage." … The Supreme Court adopted our determination that an "'intentional wrong,' qualifying for exception to the surrender of common-law remedies under
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ROLANDO MORRISON (15-04-0591, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 2, 2020
Defense counsel objected to Armstrong explaining the meaning of "shell casing" because he had not been qualified as an expert. … In order to establish the foundation for admission, no hyper technical steps must be followed— rather, the testimony must establish the accuracy and correctness of the film. Wilson, 135 N.J. at 14.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished384 N.J. Super. 546 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 28, 2005
The filing of a complaint against Wyeth clearly has eroded some of these plaintiffs’ privacy interests. … Here, the litigants clearly have the resources to accomplish these limited discovery objectives while at the same time preparing for trial. Y.
Cited 1 timesPublished285 N.J. Super. 27 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 1, 1995
Whether Gallant was involved with Nicholson's schemes may not have been clearly established, although DeMusz testified that he initially thought Gallant was involved in Nicholson's schemes; later DeMusz "guessed" that Gallant … The trial judge's response to the jury was clearly correct.
Reversed on other grounds by Sons of Thunder, Inc. v. Borden, Inc., 148 N.J. 396 (1997)Cited 14 timesPublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DEVINN K. DAVIS (18-08-1081, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 2021
He clearly—had a recollection of that. Probably the most compelling testimony was from EMT Dowens who came in and testified that when . . . … Moreover, the defense cannot be established solely by showing that the defendant might not have committed the offense had he been sober.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished358 N.J. Super. 179 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 11, 2003
Clearly that was not a proper factor in the decision to issue injunctive relief. … Kinsella, 150 N.J. 276, 318-19 , 696 A. 2d 556 (1997), no court may delegate its responsibility for a final custody or visitation decision to any expert, no matter how well qualified. P.T. v.
Cited 16 timesPublishedMary Catherine Baran v. George L. Baran
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 16, 2025
An abuse of discretion occurs "when a decision is 'made without a rational explanation, inexplicably departed from established policies, or rested on an impermissible basis.'" Ibid. (quoting U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. … "[A] party must clearly demonstrate the existence of a genuine issue as to a material fact before a hearing is necessary." Lepis, 83 N.J. at 159; accord Hand v. Hand, 391 N.J. Super. 102, 105 (App. Div. 2007).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedCalton Homes, Inc. v. Council on Affordable Housing
244 N.J. Super. 438 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 19, 1990
The relief was to be granted “sparingly” and would consist only of allowing the qualifying municipality to phase in the requisite housing “over a period of years.” Id. … Its application substantially exacerbates disparity in the obligation imposed on various municipalities in the same region and, therefore, clearly demonstrates that the cap is unreasonable.
Cited 14 timesPublishedState of New Jersey Ex Rel. Edelweiss Fund, LLC v. Jpmorgan Chase & Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 27, 2024
"[C]ourts generally 'enforce newly enacted substantive statutes prospectively, unless [the Legislature] clearly expresses a contrary intent'" for retroactive application. … When a trial court's conclusion is based on its "interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts," its conclusion is "not entitled to any special deference."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMEGHAN RYAN-WIRTH VS. HOBOKEN BOARD OF EDUCATION (DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 8, 2021
Except for a few clearly delineated exclusions stated in N.J.S.A. 34:15-7, "the injured employee is entitled to recover workers' compensation benefits regardless of fault." Tlumac, 187 N.J. at 572. … Her job duties were to perform health screenings, treat illnesses, make referrals to primary care providers, and monitor immunizations.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. SHAMECCA N. WHITFIELD (18-020, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 22, 2021
Two, the video footage clearly establishes that [defendant] had sufficient funds through her credit/debit card. … Since conviction under the shoplifting [s]tatute is not dependent on a defendant's financial status and the video evidence does not clearly establish the defendant's financial capabilities the [c]ourt will summarily disregard
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMichael Mosca v. Board of Trustees, Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 29, 2024
The Board also rejected the ALJ's attempt to minimize the language in the appointing resolutions because it "ignores well-established legal precedent." … The Legislature hoped to "encourag[e] qualified individuals to enter and remain in public service." Ibid. (quoting Masse v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedRobert J. Triffin v. Kaiser A. Pathan
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 2024
Consequently, the Pathans claim plaintiff does not qualify as a holder in due course and cannot collect payment from them. … However, in Liccardi Ford, we established that in order to take an instrument in good faith and qualify as a holder in due course under N.J.S.A. 12A:3-302(a), the assignor check cashing company must adhere to "reasonable
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna