Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.27s
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 14, 2024
If a party contends that an asset is immune from equitable distribution, the burden of proof lies with the challenging party. Landwehr v. Landwehr, 111 N.J. 491, 504 (1988). … A-1101-22 29 The party claiming that property is separately owned, and thus immune from equitable distribution, bears the burden of proof.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. James J. Mauti
448 N.J. Super. 275 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 26, 2017
The prosecutor opted to establish the family's agreed-upon course of action by asking Joanne the following leading questions: Q. … It would usurp the trial court's discretion to establish a blanket policy restricting testimony that fully qualifies for admissibility under the fresh- complaint rule but is duplicative
Cited 18 timesPublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. C.M. (85-08-0817, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 26, 2019
Earlier in his commitment, C.M. clearly lacked insight into his condition – prompting his treatment team to administer his medication by injection to avoid his discarding capsules. … Nathani is qualified as an expert witness], because . . . I'm familiar with Dr. Masry.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedANNE K. BROWN VS. REGINA FOLEY (L-7442-16, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 20, 2021
If the matter was still not resolved and the employee qualified, step three permitted the employee to request a meeting with the peer board of review within thirty days of the decision. … Second, the court established the final discovery deadline as February 27, 2019.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedAnn Christine Bartek v. John Losapio, Jr.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 7, 2025
At that meeting, McHugh explained there were certain techniques that would allow her to "qualify for Medicaid services ."2 In that regard, McHugh advised that it was standard practice for an individual to transfer the … The analysis of an undue-influence claim is governed by well-established principles.
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 timesUnpublishedJ.L. VS. S.P.L. (FM-03-1428-97, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 2019
In Newburgh, the Court provided that "[i]n general, financially capable parents should contribute to the higher education of children who are qualified students." 88 N.J. at 544. … In this circumstance, we find no error by the Family Part court that was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 27, 2019
The judge stated he "clearly [found] that the story of Officer Williams is the more credible of the two stories." … Court made clear that "when a prosecuting attorney makes application under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(f), the sole determination for the sentencing court is to confirm that the defendant has the predicate prior convictions to qualify
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JUAN DEL ROSARIO(12-09-1328, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 4, 2017
We will reverse on the basis of an unchallenged error only if it was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." Macon, supra, 57 N.J. at 337. … Participation and agreement can be established from conduct as well as the spoken words.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 2018
with industry standards for limousines."5 The hearing officer concluded the Bureau "clearly 5 To the extent the hearing officer determined plaintiff had the burden of establishing it was charging … for determining the premium fare required under N.J.S.A. 48:16-13, and that common sense dictates that limousine fares at least thirty-eight per cent higher than taxicab fares are sufficiently above the normal rate to qualify
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 11, 2019
To find out how to qualify, return this Medicare Supplement inquiry card within 5 days. … The Commissioner found that the undisputed Biskup certification established that insurance rates increased markedly less, on average by 2.4 percent.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY v. PAUL MYHAND (16-12-1020, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 2022
The State made no mention of his unavailability during trial; its responding brief is no more illuminating. 6 Instead, the State argues defendant failed to cite any "New Jersey case that presents the requirements for establishing … In isolation, we might be inclined to find the error was not "clearly capable of A-0742-19 21 producing
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 6, 2020
A-5268-17T3 27 Here, the evidence clearly and convincingly established defendant's failure to provide her four children with a permanent, safe, and stable home caused the children … And the record evidence otherwise clearly and convincing ly establishes she is not.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 6, 2026
-D. and H.A., finding the State had established admissibility "on the basis of present sense impression" and "under the excited utterance hearsay exception." … -D. described D.G. as a "sister," and she was clearly a person that D.G. would turn to for support. In fact, defense counsel acknowledged A.C.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedHarrison Redevelopment Agency v. DeRose
398 N.J. Super. 361 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 25, 2008
The fact that others since 1992 may have assumed and relied upon a belief that the LRHL is constitutional does not immunize it from review. … The LRHL does not repudiate or qualify these fundamental jurisdictional precepts embodied in the Eminent Domain Act.
Cited 29 timesPublishedIn the Matter of Gregory Rindosh, Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 13, 2026
Through the interview process, the CSC used a "qualifying unassembled examination" mode based on education and experience to score the applicants, and according to the record, all eligible candidates received identical … contains substantial evidence to support the findings on which the agency based its action; and (4) whether in applying the legislative policies to the facts, the agency clearly
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMARGARITA SORIANO, ETC. VS. 70 HUDSON STREET REALTY, LLC (L-3086-15, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 27, 2019
the opportunity to investigate the accident and issue citations for the accident.5 When OSHA ultimately learned of decedent's fatal accident twenty-one months later, OSHA officials made the decision "to investigate the establishment … While the statute grants absolute immunity to employers from common law negligence suits by employees, Cellucci v. Bronstein, 277 N.J. Super. 506, 518 (App.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 13, 2020
Based on these findings, he determined that Natalie was sexually abused by Nick, qualifying her an abused and neglected child under N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(c)(3). … We thus conclude that the failure to object was not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." Id. at 99 (quoting R. 1:7-5).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KAREEM T. TILLERY (14-06-0084, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 2017
However, if "a trial court's findings [are] so clearly mistaken 'that the interests of justice demand intervention and correction[,]' . . . … basis," and establishes "'no person can be compelled to be a witness against himself.'") (quoting State v. Zdanowicz, 69 N.J.L. 619, 622 (E.&.A. 1903)).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedState of New Jersey v. Jose Y. Martinez-Mejia
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 7, 2023
A-3472-21 18 The McLean Court found the second part of the officer's testimony inadmissible because the police officer had not been qualified as an expert and because the lay … It was evidence to be weighed by the jury under a preponderance standard if and only if they found guilt had been established. C.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna