Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.45s
In Re Tax Credit Application of Pennrose Properties, Inc.
346 N.J. Super. 479 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 15, 2002
That limitation is expressed clearly, and without equivocation, in the Developer's Agreement and is undisputed. … Laurel Township, 92 N.J. 158 , 456 A. 2d 390 (1983). [2] An "inclusionary development" such as ECLLC's would not normally qualify for low income housing tax credit.
Cited 13 timesPublished292 N.J. Super. 118 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 1996
Thus, Maxwell must establish at least one other "special reason" to fulfill N.J.S.A. 40:55D-70d's positive criteria. … As we have noted, however, the exact boundaries within which a zoning board may consider economic inutility have not been clearly drawn. Henningsen, supra, 214 N.J.
Cited 8 timesPublishedB.G. VS. E.G. (FM-20-1592-14, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 31, 2018
It placed the burden of establishing that property acquired during the marriage was immune from equitable distribution on the party that asserted the immunity. … It was defendant who bore the burden of proving that this asset was immune from equitable distribution.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 2019
Percy was qualified as an expert in pediatrics, including pediatric critical care. … Accordingly, we will only overturn the judge's findings if they "went so wide of the mark that th e judge was clearly mistaken." Ibid. (citing J.T., 269 N.J. Super. at 188-89).
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. V.
Cited 3 timesPublishedCHARLES SMITH VS. DANIELLE SMITH (FM-14-0192-16, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 29, 2021
[and] will not qualify as an asset eligible for distribution." Painter v. Painter, 65 N.J. 196, 214 (1974). "[I]f such property . . . later increases in value, such increment enjoys a like immunity." Ibid. … "The burden of establishing such immunity as to any particular asset will rest upon the spouse who asserts it." Ibid.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedThe Law Office of Rajeh A. Saadeh, LLC v. Wendy McCarsky
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 7, 2026
On November 2, 2022, the parties entered into a retainer agreement in connection with a post-judgment matrimonial matter relating to the negotiation of a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) for equitable distribution … It has long been established that the Law Division lacks jurisdiction to review a fee arbitration determination. See Linker v. Co. Car Corp., 281 N.J. Super. 579, 586 (App.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDcpp v. L.A. and H.G., in the Matter of J.G. and Z.G.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 5, 2025
The Division investigated and determined the referral was not established. … Biller was qualified as an expert in clinical psychology, specializing in forensic child maltreatment.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAmherst Farms Homeowners Association, Inc. v. D.M. and L.S.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 2025
The court noted it was "unable to find any . . . law" that chickens qualify as ESAs under either the FHA or LAD and that defendants failed to meet their burden of establishing chickens were ESAs. … However, the HUD Guidance clearly recognized that a person seeking an accommodation must establish the need for the specific A-4057-23
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedELVIRA DUBOIS, ETC. VS. SENIOR LIVING SOLUTIONS, LLC (L-5987-16, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 5, 2021
Plaintiff clearly should have anticipated that proximate cause was a critical element in establishing a prima facie case of medical negligence. Komlodi v. Picciano, 217 N.J. 387, 409 (2014). … Starer was qualified to render these opinions based on his years of experience and his board certification in geriatrics.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished450 N.J. Super. 210 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 22, 2017
jadmissible in evidence; provided, however, that no such statement, if uncorroborated, shall be sufficient to make a fact finding of abuse or neglect. 10 The statute does not define who can qualify … Macon, 57 N.J. 325, 340 (1971), or whether it was sufficiently prejudicial to have been "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2.
Cited 16 timesPublishedAtlantic Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hillside Bottling Co., Inc.
387 N.J. Super. 224 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 9, 2006
The qualifying phrase, "to which this insurance applies" underscores the basic notion that the premium paid by the insured does not buy coverage for all property damage but only for that type of damage provided for in the … The insuring clauses set forth standard terms of a CGL policy that have well-established meanings.
Cited 53 timesPublishedMary Horne v. Jasi Mikae Edwards
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 5, 2023
"Any error or omission shall be disregarded by the appellate court unless it is of such a nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result . . . ." R. 2:10-2. … They believe shoplifting qualifies as a crime of dishonesty and assert Edwards should be required to forfeit her public employment pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:51-2(a).
Cited 0 timesPublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. A.L.A. (17-01-0157, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 2021
Although defendant argues in her merits brief that "the parties appeared to agree that the language from K.A. would be used to qualify both the endangering and the simple assault charges," the record does not establish … "If the plain language chosen by the Legislature 'leads to a clearly understood result' . . . we apply the law as written." State v. Robinson, 217 N.J. 594, 604 (2014) (quoting State v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 2021
Plaintiff clearly failed to comply with Rule 4:17-7, which prohibits a party from amending interrogatory answers within twenty days of the discovery end date unless the party "certifies . . . that the information requiring … "[A] public entity is 'immune from tort liability unless there is a specific statutory provision' that makes it answerable for a negligent act or omission." Polzo v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedBoard of Education v. New Jersey Education Ass'n
96 N.J. Super. 371 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 4, 1967
The direct and deplorable action taken in dismissing qualified and competent leaders (and nontenure teachers) of the Union Beach Teachers xlssociation. … Article 1, par. 19 of the Constitution clearly recognizes the distinction between public and private employees.
Cited 3 timesPublished373 N.J. Super. 302 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 29, 2004
Jacoby is also a qualified expert authority and had determined that Peaches is a major contributing factor to my present and future well-being. … Here the plaintiff [ac]quired a dog that clearly by his own admission from his own dep[osition] testimony weighed 47 pounds.
Cited 11 timesPublishedDavid Kozak v. Board of Trustees, Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 9, 2025
Schreiber, qualified as an expert in clinical psychology, also testified on petitioner's behalf. Dr. … Filippone, qualified as an expert in clinical psychology, was engaged by PFRS to conduct an independent medical examination on petitioner.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished386 N.J. Super. 404 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 2006
. at 653-54 , 581 A.2d 123 ; accord In re the Action of M. for the Adoption of P., an Adult, 193 N.J.Super. 33, 37 , 471 A.2d 1220 (Ch.Div.1983) (“The purpose of [the adult adoption statute] was to permit adults who are qualified … In support of their claim of improper purpose, defendants rely on cases clearly distinguishable from this matter, mostly involving issues of a grantor’s or testator’s probable intent to include adoptees within the class of
Cited 2 timesPublishedDonna MacRi Fatovic v. Damir Fatovic
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 9, 2024
"Only when the trial court's conclusions are so 'clearly mistaken' or 'wide of the mark' should we interfere." Gnall v. Gnall, 222 N.J. 414, 428 (2015) (quoting N.J. Div. of Youth & Fam. Servs. v. … The burden of establishing that an asset or any portion thereof is immune from distribution rests on the party claiming its immunity. Pacifico v. Pacifico, 190 N.J. 258, 269 (2007).
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna