Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
5,442 results
4.00s
IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF JANE E. GEHRKE (P-0864-2006, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 2020
While the accounts qualified for a five-year deferred payment, which would push the tax to the individual beneficiaries rather than the estate, it would only work if all beneficiaries agreed and refunding bonds were signed … "If this requires the non-movant to produce all his evidence, he must do so to establish clearly the existence of a genuine issue of a material fact," especially where the evidence is "peculiarly within the non-movant's
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 19, 2020
explained that he spoke with Sostre, who stated that a A-2058-18T3 12 masters-level therapist would be qualified … findings unless it is determined that they went so wide of the mark that the judge A-2058-18T3 25 was clearly
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 28, 2025
Del Russo was one of several people who were instrumental in bringing the Child First Finding Words protocol to New Jersey, and he was qualified as an expert in the protocol. … We conclude the trial court's ruling was clearly erroneous because it was directly contrary to the facts.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedMelissa Schwartz v. Michael Kopelman, Esq.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 2026
If a board's decision is "made in good faith based on reasonable business knowledge," then it is "immune from liability from actions brought by others who have an interest in the business entity." Ibid. … The amended counterclaims clearly set forth facts related to the December 2020 leak and the access issues.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedBONEFISH CAPITAL, LLC v. AUTOSHRED, LLC (L-1782-16 and L-2804-17, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 22, 2022
respect to K-2 and Levitt; and 3) in any event, the tail in the Bonefish Agreement only applied to post-termination deals that had been negotiated, arranged or introduced by Bonefish, and the deal with Pelas did not qualify … A trial court decision will constitute an abuse of discretion where "the decision [was] made without a rational explanation, inexplicably departed from established policies, or rested on an impermissible basis."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY v. CHARLES M. GRANT (15-12-1007, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 15, 2022
That standard requires reversal only if the testimony was "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. … When evidence is admitted for a permissible use under N.J.R.E. 404(b), such as to establish motive, it "must be appropriately sanitized," so that the harmful evidence is limited to that which is necessary to establish the
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedKAYVAN KAROON VS. LISA KAROON (FM-02-1549-19, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 2021
As a breast cancer survivor, defendant worked to qualify for health A-2675-19 3 insurance and explained … To the contrary, he determined the MSA compelled an award because plaintiff "litigate[d] to establish, obtain and enforce his rights under the [a]greement."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 2024
He testified that defendant was "a trained sex worker" who clearly conveyed when she wanted to have sex. … Here, the record clearly establishes that the parties were unable to exercise such restraint.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedFRED BONDA VS. CITY OF ELIZABETH (L-1979-13, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 21, 2019
A jury could reasonably find that each of these actions qualify as an "adverse employment action" within the meaning of CEPA because they affect hours, payment, benefits, and promotional procedures. … In sum, plaintiff presented sufficient credible evidence demonstrating that, on numerous occasions, upper management threatened and abused him, as well as numerous instances where upper management was clearly aware that
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Real Estate Commission v. Richard A. Karpf
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 2024
Clearly, teaching is not related to [Karpf's] real estate business." … Res judicata or claim preclusion applies when a party seeking to apply the doctrine establishes: (1) a valid judgment on the merits was entered on the claim in a prior action; (2) the parties in the later action are identical
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedTODD KELLY VS. J. CHRISTIAN BOLLWAGE (L-2647-16 AND L-3562-16, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 2, 2021
During oral argument, plaintiffs asserted that the failure to promote anyone to fill the July 1, 2016 vacancy was a discrete act clearly within the one- year statute of limitations. … Each year the Parking Authority advertises a Request for Qualifications to pre-qualify prospective accountants based on experience and expertise.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 10, 2017
To the contrary, the evidence establishes there was insufficient time for this to have occurred. … The severe beating of the victim qualified as a startling event and it is readily apparent from the content of the 911 recorded statements that the longtime friend remained under the excitement caused by the beating.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedJOHN M. BALKOVIC VS. MARIANNE BALKOVIC (FM-13-0677-09, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 18, 2019
Torres, 183 N.J. 554, 572 (2005)), and occurs when the trial judge's decision is "made without a rational explanation, inexplicably departed from established policies, or rested on an impermissible basis." Milne v. … According to defendant, "[t]hese grounds also qualify under [Rule 4:50- 1(a) and (b)]" because she "demonstrated excusable neglect since she did not know the date of the hearing nor when to file any opposition" and "the
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 14, 2021
"When the credibility of witnesses is an important factor, the trial court's conclusions must be given great weight and must be accepted by the appellate court unless clearly lacking in reasonable support." N.J. … "[T]o satisfy the fourth prong, the State should offer testimony of a 'well [-]qualified expert who has had full opportunity to make a comprehensive, objective, and informed evaluation' of the child's relationship with
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedDcpp v. R.O. and G.C., in the Matter of the Guardianship of O.C., R.A.C., and J.O.C.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 23, 2025
Katz was "very well qualified" and a "credible witness." However, "the [c]ourt found some of his conclusions perplexing." It further found Dr. … We first address whether the court properly determined the Division established prongs one and two pursuant to N.J.S.A. 30:4C-15.1(a).
Cited 0 timesUnpublished608-610 Mullica Hill Road, LLC v. Cumberland County Improvement Authority
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 25, 2025
Plaintiffs also argued that CCIA's conduct did not qualify as one of the exceptions to takings as articulated in Cedar Point Nursery because CCIA did not comply with its obligations under the Spill Act. … In addition, plaintiffs argued that they clearly suffered damages because the Property was left "disturbed and . . . in a condition that's inferior than it was before."
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 2020
And the judge clearly instructed the jury that assessing the transcript's accuracy was ultimately a question for the jury. Taken as a whole, the instruction was inartful, but not incorrect. … Milligan, 71 N.J. 373, 384 (1976) (establishing abuse-of-discretion standard of review). Bernard had the burden to overcome the informant's privilege. N.J.R.E. 516.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 17, 2018
DVO Report was "required to be made pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:25- 24(a) and is therefore not a criminal investigatory record," and "that I should have listed the [DVO Report] separately in my [February 12] response . . . clearly … "Because the tape falls within the definition of a 'government record' in N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1.1, and because the law requires that such tapes be made and kept, it does not qualify as a 'criminal investigatory record.'"
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedSTATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. LAURIE WINT (12-09-2523, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 2017
In considering defendant's contentions on this issue, we apply well-established principles of appellate review. … Clearly, defendant himself did not "initiate" the back-to-back interview, and the trial court made no such finding.
Cited 0 timesUnpublishedNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 3, 2022
The judge concluded the Division had "clearly demonstrated that termination of parental rights will not do more harm than good to each of the children." She credited Dr. … The standards guiding our review of the parties' arguments are well established.
Cited 0 timesUnpublished
Ask Donna