Case law

State of New Jersey v. Antwione A. Parsley

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 2025

"[T]o qualify as newly discovered evidence entitling a party to a new trial, the new evidence must be (1) material to the issue and not merely cumulative or impeaching or contradictory; (2) discovered since the trial and … For these reasons, Parsley's claim of newly discovered exonerating evidence is clearly unavailing. We affirm Judge Eastlack's prudent and well supported rejection of the claim.

Sandra Paez v. Ruben Moscoso, Sr.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 11, 2026

The court found Bekus was qualified to testify and that he had a factual basis to support his opinions. … On September 19, the court found plaintiff had established violations of the CFA, but reserved decision on whether plaintiff suffered an ascertainable loss because of those violations.

State v. Roman

382 N.J. Super. 44 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 23, 2005

The choice of words and the manner of presentation qualify, in the circumstances, contextually, as prosecutorial misconduct. … The line of cross-examination the prosecutor employed here clearly violated that standard.

Dcpp v. J.Y.J. and K.O., in the Matter of K.J. and A.J.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 10, 2024

A trial court's findings are accorded deference "unless it is determined that they went so wide of the mark that the judge was clearly mistaken." N.J. Div. of Youth & Fam. Servs. v. G.L., 191 N.J. 596, 605 (2007). … Parinello, were both qualified experts who credibly established Jane's "untreated mental health A-1479-22

IN THE MATTER OF D.L.B. (0119-XTR-2020-000001, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 14, 2021

See, e.g., N.J.S.A. 2C:58-3(f) (providing for revocation of firearm purchaser identification card if person no longer qualifies). … Persons who do not qualify as a "family or household member" must convince law enforcement to file a petition based on the evidence those persons present.

Verni Ex Rel. Burstein v. STEVENS, INC.

387 N.J. Super. 160 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 3, 2006

Lanzaro admitted that he did not clearly remember all of the events of the day but recalled that while tailgating before the game, he had consumed two or three of the eight twelve-ounce beers he had in his truck. … The Court observed that the doctrine of parental immunity should be retained "in the areas involving the exercise of parental authority or the provision of customary child care." Ibid.

MIN AMY GUO v. NOVARTIS PHARMACEUTICALS CORPORATION (L-1486-14, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 25, 2022

Establishment Lodestar Award. i. Establishing Appropriate Hourly Rates. ii. … Finally, the court may grant a motion for JNOV only "if, having given due regard to the opportunity of the jury to pass upon the credibility of the witnesses, it clearly and convincingly appears that there was a miscarriage

AP Smith Mfg. Co. v. Barlow

26 N.J. Super. 106 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 19, 1953

Finally, the legislation challenged in this case is clearly sustainable under the police power reserved to and residing in each State. … individuals, are subject to be interfered with, or otherwise affected by, subsequent statutes enacted in the bona fide exercise of the police power, and do not, by reason of the contracts clause of the constitution, enjoy any immunity

R.A. VS. WEST ESSEX REGIONAL SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION (L-8607-18 and L-4811-19, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 30, 2021

entity both to plead and prove its immunity under [the TCA] . . . ."). … The motion court determined Counts Two and Three of the complaints allege sufficient facts to establish a cognizable claim for the negligence causes of action asserted.

VERONICA VARGAS v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 21, 2022

The Court noted while the husband did not live long enough to qualify for early retirement, his family would have been entitled to greater benefits had he selected and qualified … Rather, it is whether petitioner's circumstances were sufficient to establish good cause to reopen the pension selection. In our view, petitioner has not established good cause.

Velazquez Ex Rel. Velazquez v. Portadin

321 N.J. Super. 558 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1999

Clearly, only the policies in the protocols that plaintiffs' experts identified as being in accord with the applicable standard of care were admissible. The policies standing alone did not establish a standard of care. … And I qualified all of those persons as witnesses—or as experts....

Simon v. Board of Trustees

233 N.J. Super. 186 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 10, 1989

The two new sections read as follows: No county sheriff shall qualify for membership in the Police and Firemen's Retirement System of New Jersey pursuant to this amendatory and supplementary act if he has reached the age … 3.6] Any officer eligible to become a member pursuant to the amendatory provisions of this act who is enrolled in the Public Employees' Retirement System (P.L. 1954, c. 84, C. 43:15A-1 et seq.) or any county pension fund established

Rsb Lab. Services, Inc. v. Bsi Corp.

368 N.J. Super. 540 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 2004

She was also qualified by the State to operate this type of facility. She admitted, however, that in her capacity as a supervisor she did not have any actual experience operating the laboratory equipment. … That is not a sufficient basis for us to say that Perini, which only involved arbitration and was itself overruled on other grounds in Tretina Printing, ... clearly undermined the authority of Weiss . See also V.A.L.

N.J. Dep't of Envtl. Prot. v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

453 N.J. Super. 272 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 12, 2018

See Pressler & Verniero, cmt. 1 on R. 4:33-2 ("Clearly those without standing in the first instance are also without sufficient interest to warrant intervention."). … Because the Legislature required public notice, in addition to the written notice DEP must provide to all parties and possible parties of which the agency is aware, we doubt the Legislature intended notice and comment would immunize

In re the Trust for the Benefit of Duke

305 N.J. Super. 408 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 1995

Duke, can clearly be ascertained on the face of the instrument. … Heffner does not qualify as a lineal descendant under the Doris Duke Trust. Ms.

Bowen v. Mayor and Council of Long Branch

79 N.J. Super. 177 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 10, 1963

Prior to the commencement of *183 the hearing city council adopted a resolution establishing certain "Rules of Procedure" for the conduct of the hearing. … At the very outset, it clearly appears that the statute does not require that the city manager may be removed only for cause.

Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Hyman

334 N.J. Super. 400 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 2000

It has been said to be against public policy to permit a `middleman' to intervene for profit in establishing the professional relationship between members of the medical profession and members of the public. [ Dunn v. … Here, Cimmie Hyman's misrepresentation concerning her lost wage claim was clearly material to Liberty Mutual's "concerns and important in determining its course of action[ ]" in deciding whether to honor her claims for insurance

Thomsen v. Mercer-Charles

377 N.J. Super. 267 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 28, 2005

Instead, it pays only those losses qualifying as "covered claims" pursuant to the terms of the Act. See Carpenter Tech. Corp., supra, 172 N.J. at 508-09 , 800 A. 2d at 56-57 . … The court reasoned that any additional sums theoretically recoverable against the driver were dependent upon a showing of the driver's fault, and that had never been established.

State of New Jersey v. Akeem M. Barptelus

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 12, 2025

We discern the salient facts from the record established at the suppression hearing and the motion to compel a buccal swab. … Gathers, 234 N.J. 208, 221-22 (2018), determining "the case at bar presents distinct facts and circumstances that qualify as a justifiable delay."

In Re JP

772 A.2d 54 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 2001

Following testimony by two expert witnesses for the State and one expert for J.P., the judge found that J.P. qualified as a violent sexual predator. … VII J.P. next argues that the State did not establish by clear and convincing evidence that he is likely to commit acts of sexual violence in the foreseeable future.