Case law

JOEL DAWKINS VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 12, 2021

David Weiss, who was qualified as an expert in orthopedics and in impairment and disability. Dr. … He contends the A-3086-19 10 evidence clearly established the causal relationship between the January 7, 2014

State of New Jersey v. Frank Nucera

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 31, 2024

N.J.S.A. 43:1-3.1(b), the person is subject to the mandatory forfeiture of benefits under N.J.S.A. 43:1-3.1(a) only if an analysis of the elements of the federal or other-state crime for which the person was convicted establishes … He knowingly refrains from performing a duty which is imposed upon him by law or is clearly inherent in the nature of his office.

State of New Jersey v. Christopher Reynoso

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 10, 2026

In particular, [the interrogation video] clearly demonstrates several occasions where Ms. … See, e.g., R. 3:17 (establishing standards for electronic recordation).

State of New Jersey v. Jamel Carlton

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 2024

consideration of objective facts about defendant's prior convictions, such as the dates of convictions, his age when the offenses were committed, and the elements and degrees of the offenses, in order to determine whether he qualifies … Rule 2:10-2 ("Any error or omission shall be disregarded by the appellate court unless it is of such nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result, but the appellate court may, in the interests of

U.S. Bank Trust National Association, Etc. v. James L. McElwee, Jr.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 2025

The Nava Certification is sufficient to establish the default of the Note and Mortgage, as Ms. Nava has personal knowledge of the business documents establishing the default. … The signed electronic certified mailing receipt clearly indicated the NOI was sent via certified mail, return receipt requested, in accordance with the FFA.

Mist Pharmaceuticals, LLC v. Berkley Insurance Company

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 9, 2024

However, there is guidance for exclusions with similar qualifying language. In Am. Motorists Ins. Co. v. … Underwriters, Inc., 147 A.D.3d 418, 420 (2017) (applying New York law, holding counterclaim allegations in underlying action clearly show capacity exclusion applies to bar coverage as conduct arose out of plaintiff's dual

State v. Mazowski

337 N.J. Super. 275 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 15, 2001

We are satisfied that the evidence in question here does not qualify under the Cofield four-part test. … Div.1967), neither case clearly supports the State's position.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. TRAVIS L. PLUMMER (18-09-0832, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 2021

The evidence established that defendant not only failed to properly dispose of the child's remains, but he purposefully and admittedly concealed them. … Noting that the State had made the necessary application under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3(a), Judge Arre found defendant to qualify as a persistent offender.

PINE BROOK CARE CENTER VS. MICHAEL D'ALESSANDRO (L-4774-17, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 23, 2020

Michael into plaintiff's nursing home, Manganella informed Antoinette that Michael would be admitted as a private-pay-rate resident because "he was not eligible for Medicare [at the] time and . . . he was not already qualified … Moreover, we are confident that if the Legislature intended to grant the broad immunity from personal liability the court found, and which defendants urge, it would have done so more clearly and directly.

CYNTHIA MEEKINS VS. STATE HEALTH BENEFITS COMMISSION (STATE HEALTH BENEFITS COMMISSION)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 6, 2021

She asserts she qualifies for retiree SHBP coverage based on her thirty-one years of public service and contributions to PERS. … The intent of the statute and regulations is clearly and unambiguously stated: for a PERS retiree to be eligible for SHBP, he or she must be an employee at the time of retirement.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. CHRISTOPHER G. ORSINI (17-07-0488, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 24, 2018

Although acknowledging the video qualified for admission under Driver, the court questioned its probative value. … The State appeals, arguing no rule or case requires the State to pre-admit a 911 recording prior to trial, and that the recording is not testimonial and clearly admissible under J.A.

Bahrle v. Exxon Corp.

279 N.J. Super. 5 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 9, 1995

Consequently, once all of the evidence was admitted, the jury's finding that Kalsch-Forte owned the tanks was not clearly against the weight of the evidence. Corrino v. … An expert must "be suitably qualified and possessed of sufficient specialized knowledge to be able to express [an expert opinion] and to explain the basis of that opinion." State v.

M.Z. v. V.R.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 9, 2025

Further, the court explained: [I]n the supervised visitation summaries from late 2023 which the [c]ourt has had the opportunity to review, in camera, the [d]efendant was clearly displaying … Due to this failure, we are satisfied defendant did not meet her burden of establishing a prima facie change of circumstances to modify the prior custody orders.

Adoption of Child by Ps

315 N.J. Super. 91 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 1998

The trial judge noted that "it was clearly intended that there be family reunification. And at the very least, a hearing with regard to that." … Clearly [A.R.] is bonded to her foster mother, whom she regards as her central love object and attachment figure.

Ideal Dairy Farms, Inc. v. Farmland Dairy Farms, Inc.

282 N.J. Super. 140 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 27, 1995

We find Ideal’s reliance on Pick-Barth, supra, and its progeny clearly misplaced. … Omark Indus., Inc., supra, 576 F.2d at 90-91 (where plaintiff established that it lost opportunities to increase profits and strengthen its market position, but did not establish injury to competition as opposed to injury

State of New Jersey v. Anthony L. Gibson

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 2025

Here, defendant was charged in count two under N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2(a), which concerns the commission of a qualifying unauthorized act. … D.A., 191 N.J. 158, 163 (2007), the evidence therefore sufficed to establish defendant's guilt of theft.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JEREMIAH E. MONELL (17-03-0270, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 15, 2021

AT A FRYE HEARING; (2) CRAIN DID NOT FOLLOW ESTABLISHED QUALITY CONTROL PROTOCOLS FOR FRICTION RIDGE ANALYSIS; AND (3) CRAIN'S CONCLUSIONS WERE NOT QUALIFIED OR LIMITED IN … ACCORDANCE WITH ESTABLISHED STANDARDS.

Leasehold Estates, Inc. v. Fulbro Holding Co.

47 N.J. Super. 534 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 22, 1957

The participation in the lease transaction by Willoughby, even though as president of Franklin Motor Car Company, is thus clearly evidential of a belief in 1926 by the owner of parcel 5 that he had no right to the contemplated … Abandonment was found not established. Accordant findings of claimants' interests in the alleyway were made.

IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF A.Y. SVP-545-09 (ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 14, 2019

s] criminal behavior qualifies as repetitive and compulsive under the statute. It is more likely that antisocial, sadistic and narcissistic motivations drove his criminal sexual behavior." … The judge found the State clearly and convincingly proved its case for civil commitment.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. TREY I. LENTZ (18-07-0971, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 16, 2020

by a preponderance of the evidence that the search of defendant's hands for [GSR] was sufficiently contemporaneous and proximate to his arrest . . . to qualify as a search incident to arrest." … They clearly had the opportunity and the obligation to so do in the absence of circumstances that would have justified a warrantless search.