Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
0.30s
In the Matter of the Petition of New Jersey Natural Gas Company, Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 17, 2025
The BPU further reasoned NJNG's site analysis established that there were no reasonably available alternative sites that would achieve an equivalent public benefit. … [The Township]'s Arguments Do Not Establish That [T]he [BPU] and ALJ's Necessity Findings Were Erroneous. 1.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 29, 2017
of fact upon which the sentencing court based the application of those guidelines; and third, whether in applying those guidelines to the relevant facts the trial court clearly … Further, Gadson qualified for an extended term sentence, which was consistent with his plea agreement.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 2021
Thus, the Board concluded that PPA was "attempting to import new evidence into the record, when the authoring witnesses ha[d] not been qualified to testify nor been subject to cross- examination." … Also, Superstorm Sandy clearly demonstrated the impact and cost that an extensive curtailment of service can have on a public utility's customers.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 1, 2017
Thus, we review his argument under a plain error standard, which requires a showing of error "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." State v. … Revision Commission noted three contexts in which the unilateral approach would yield a different result from a bilateral approach: "[w]here the person with whom the defendant conspired" (1) "is irresponsible or has immunity
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedJANE DOE, ETC. VS. CITY OF TRENTON (L-1813-17, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 7, 2019
"Indeed, historically, '[t]he common law makes a much broader class of documents available than [OPRA], but on a qualified basis.'" O'Shea, 410 N.J. Super. at 386 (alterations in original) (quoting Daily Journal v. … The policy further provides, "[t]he contents of the internal investigation case files will be retained in the Internal Affairs Unit and clearly marked as confidential."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedIn the Matter of the Suspension or Revocation of the License of Louis Quartararo, M.D., Etc.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 31, 2024
A-0425-22 11 The ALJ qualified Dr. Ashraf as an expert in the field of orthopedic spine surgery.5 Dr. … Davis and Koh, both of whom the ALJ qualified as experts in the field of orthopedic spine surgery. Dr. Davis and Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 7, 2020
The Court Erred in Substituting For a Juror After the Jury's Deliberations Clearly Had Progressed to a Stage Precluding Reconstitution. B. The Reconstituted Jury Clearly Did Not Deliberate Anew. C. … The lack of earlier notice was not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedISABELLA BLUMBERG VS. GIRSH BLUMBERG (FM-20-1243-10, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 23, 2017
In A-4070-14, defendant appeals from two orders entered on March 24, 2015, which approved two Qualified Domestic Relations Orders (QDROs) submitted by plaintiff. … However, the "trial court's interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts are not entitled to any special deference."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY v. FREDERICK OWLE (17-07-0728, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 2022
The testimony was clearly hearsay." Ibid. The Court in State v. … We are mindful of the well-established principle that a failure to object permits an inference that any error in admitting the testimony was not prejudicial. See State v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 2021
Therefore, she concluded that Zach was "clearly in need of permanency as soon as possible[,]" and that any further delay in the hopes of defendant engaging in services "when she has made minimal progress would only further … Therefore, the judge concluded that the Division had established the fourth statutory prong by clear and convincing evidence and terminatio n of defendant's parental rights would not do more harm than good because the
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DEWAYNE R. ANDERSON (11-06-0570, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 2019
We will reverse on the basis of an unchallenged error only if it was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." Macon, 75 N.J. at 337. … According to defendant, the judge also erred by failing to weigh defendant's prior record of conviction in qualifying him as a persistent offender and "double counted" to justify an elevated base term.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedROBERT DECOTIIS VS. DR. HARMON STEIN (L-1139-14, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 30, 2019
[justifying] . . . a full preliminary hearing under" Rule 104, the record supports the trial judge's decision to hold a Rule 104 hearing to elicit more clearly the factual basis for Dr. … These facts form a legally sufficient basis to support the trial judge's decision to qualify Dr.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 5, 2022
In their Rule 4:46-2(b) counterstatement of material facts, plaintiffs admitted that the closing occurred on August 17, 2009, qualified, however, by a statement, without record or documentary support, that "the transaction … Even if plaintiffs' claims did not accrue on or about the closing date, plaintiffs were clearly aware of actionable claims related to the purported improper retention of the escrowed funds on October 12, 2011, when Tabasso
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedRICHARD TUOSTO VS. THERESE BRADY (L-5696-15, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 17, 2019
Ultimately, the court considered several factors and found the plaintiffs established the windmill was a nuisance "independent" of any violation of the noise ordinance. Id. at 218-19. … "[T]he question of whether plain error occurred depends on whether the error was clearly capable of producing an unjust result.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedH.C.F. VS. J.T.B. (FV-14-1099-15, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)(RECORD IMPOUNDED)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 7, 2017
Applying the first prong of the two-prong Silver1 analysis, the court determined that plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence that defendant committed the predicate acts of criminal … Clearly, the defendant knew he was doing it and it appears that there's really no . . . issue that the door was damaged and taken off the hinges.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedREALTY APPRAISAL COMPANY VS. CITY OF JERSEY CITY, ETC.(L-5899-13, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 13, 2017
Since the omissions were of no significance, the two-part test is clearly passed. … To show bad faith, the claimant must establish that the alleged breaching party had an improper motive.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ROLAND E. AMOS (15-01-0110 AND 15-01-0115, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 13, 2019
writing made or signed by the witness [under] circumstances establishing its reliability[.]" N.J.R.E. 803(a)(1)(A). … The judge therefore found that defendant qualified for an extended term both as a persistent offender under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3(a), and as a second- time firearm offender under N.J.S.A. 2C:44-3(d).
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedWawa, Inc. v. Starr Surplus Lines Insurance Company
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 5, 2024
Here, Wawa's Policies clearly and unambiguously require a suspension of a claimant's business be caused by a physical tangible alteration to the property. … Only the actual release of the asbestos fibers or the "imminent threat" of such a release could qualify as a "loss" under the all-risk policy. Ibid. The Third Circuit recently affirmed this principle in Wilson v.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedJENNIFER MACK v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 24, 2022
Because we agree with the Board that Mack failed to establish her disabling condition was the reason she left Delran, we affirm. I. … "A teacher with a disabling mental condition may qualify for ordinary disability retirement benefits." Bueno, 404 N.J. Super. at 126.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNARSAN LINGALA VS. SAROJA ALKANTI (FM-12-2371-11, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 16, 2017
2012 order denying plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of the October 26, 2012 order; (3) a February 11, 2013 consent order enforcing certain provisions of the MSA; (4) an April 18, 2013 consent order imposing a qualified … The rule is but a corollary to the established principle that any act of a litigant "by which he expressly or impliedly recognizes the 15 A-4643-14T3 validity
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna