Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.36s
STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. J.T. (09-06-1113, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 13, 2018
Keep in mind, however, that although the burden rests upon the defendant to establish the defense of insanity by a preponderance of the credible evidence, the burden of proving the … Simring gave this testimony, this colossal error was clearly capable of producing an unjust result.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRosa M. Williams-Hopkins v. Medwell, LLC
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 5, 2024
O'Neill, 217 N.J. 99 (2014), regarding collection of nursing home fees] would qualify for the learned professional exception to the CFA.'" Id. at 124. … In response, MedWell reprises its arguments that (1) appellants failed to establish damages, (2) the litigation privilege applies because the insurance information disclosed was relevant and necessary to establish the amount
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. Brian R. Auxer
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 2024
"[A]n unchallenged error constitutes plain error if it was 'clearly capable of producing an unjust result,'" Singh, 245 N.J. at 13 (quoting R. 2:10-2), and "raise[s] 'a reasonable doubt . . . … Greenfield was not the doctor who actually administered the CAT scan, and he was not qualified as an expert.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 11, 2020
Grow NJ was established "to encourage economic development and job creation and to preserve jobs that currently exist in New Jersey but which are in danger of being relocated outside of the State." … of Manalapan, 140 N.J. 366, 378 (1995), and we will reverse only if an error was "of such a nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result," R. 2:10-2.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. WALTER TOWNSEND (02-01-0137, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 26, 2018
For claims that evidence is newly discovered and sufficient to warrant a new trial, courts apply the following well-established standard: [T]o qualify as newly discovered evidence entitling a party … "[E]vidence clearly A-2272-17T4 15 capable of altering the outcome of a verdict that could have been discovered
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 11, 2020
Grow NJ was established "to encourage economic development and job creation and to preserve jobs that currently exist in New Jersey but which are in danger of being relocated outside of the State." … of Manalapan, 140 N.J. 366, 378 (1995), and we will reverse only if an error was "of such a nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result," R. 2:10-2.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. Christopher Udell Teeter
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 11, 2024
Basically my understanding is that if you have any type of employment, whether it be babysitting or anything that you can qualify for payment as a juror. … Our sentencing standard of review is well established. We review sentences "in accordance with a deferential standard," State v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedBorough of Spotswood v. Middlesex County Prosecutor's Office
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 5, 2026
In assessing these arguments, we are guided by well-established principles of appellate review and statutory construction. … If it clearly reveals the Legislature's intent, the inquiry is over." Ibid. (citing DiProspero v. Penn, 183 N.J. 477, 492 (2005)).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedWcpp Risk Purchasing Group, Inc. v. Lexington Insurance Company
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 13, 2025
The evidence also establishes that the parties intended to cover Stoney Run. … The language clearly focuses on "cause" of the loss, conveying the intention to exclude mold as a cause of loss. But mold which is the loss is not mentioned.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY v. N.K. (13-02-0159, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 2022
Defendant further averred he "was extremely high during jury selection when the court observed [him] asleep," and his decision to flee the country was an example of his "inability to think clearly and fail[ure] to exercise … A-4332-19 6 abuse evaluation, but he could not afford one and his counsel did not advise him that he might qualify
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. Israel Hiraldo
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 14, 2023
The trial court "need not engage in a voir dire on the record to establish [a] defendant's waiver." Ibid. … Super. ___ (slip op. at 20–21) (noting the defendant did not submit certifications establishing he would have satisfied other criteria under N.J.S.A. 2C:58-4(b) and -(c) to qualify for a gun-carry permit).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDCPP VS. C.L., B.W., J.O. AND C.C.IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF M.K.W., M.J.C.AND S.C.O.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 3, 2017
Andrew Brown, also qualified as an expert in psychology, testified on behalf of defendant. … The harm may be established by "a delay in establishing a stable and permanent home." D.M.H., supra, 161 N.J. at 383. The second prong of the best interests standard relates to parental unfitness.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 5, 2020
The record, however, demonstrates that and other evidence established the first prong. … And, considering their failure to submit documentation regarding their respective criminal histories, it is unknown if they were qualified as resource parents.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. Gerald S. Chapman
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 21, 2026
He was qualified as an expert in ballistics. … They are clearly in danger when they[ are] with you, and I am going to stop that, you are not going to live with . . . us until this is figured out. . . .
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSHELLEY PRITCHETT VS. STATE OF NEW JERSEY (L-2189-13, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 2020
With removals we have establish[ed] a winning defense. … See also Donelson, 206 N.J. at 258 (establishing front pay damages are available in LAD cases "provided there is sufficient proof both to establish that the injury will impair [the plaintiff's] future income and to quantify
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedTUHIN PANDYA VS. ROOPAL SHAH (FM-12-1499-12, MIDDLESEX COUNTYAND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 3, 2020
Hagovsky as a qualified expert and plaintiff made no objections. Defendant then moved Dr. Hagovsky's report into evidence for consideration, without any objection from plaintiff. … A judge abuses his or her discretion where the award is "manifestly unreasonable, arbitrary, or clearly contrary to reason or to other evidence, or the result of whim or caprice." Jacoby v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAIDA MINEROS VS. DIANA LONDON (L-3794-13, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 19, 2018
"Since Stewart, residential-public-sidewalk immunity has remained intact." Qian, 223 N.J. at 136. … Div. 1991) (acknowledging immunity for "owner-occupants whose residency is established to be the predominant use," but reversing summary judgment for defendants and remanding "to permit exploration of the predominance
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 12, 2020
The Preclusion Of Evidence From Defendant's Wife That Established J.M.' … The trial court found the challenged evidence qualified as past sexual conduct of Julie, and that it was therefore barred by the Rape Shield law.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 12, 2020
The Preclusion Of Evidence From Defendant's Wife That Established J.M.' … The trial court found the challenged evidence qualified as past sexual conduct of Julie, and that it was therefore barred by the Rape Shield law.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedJason Leventhal v. Lori Anne Di Paolo-Leventhal
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 13, 2025
Plaintiff "clearly had the authority to disperse the full $835,000 whenever he wished" since he had released $400,000 in October 2020, and another $100,000 in 2021. … The trial judge noted plaintiff admitted he invaded the children's 529s for non-educational purposes and non-qualified expenses.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna