Case law

Di Ciurcio v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

299 N.J. Super. 426 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 1997

(Neither Liberty nor Allstate *429 contends that plaintiff failed to comply with the procedures established in Longworth v. … analysis if the Allstate policy purchased by plaintiffs father provided only $15,000/$30,000 UIM coverage, thereby making plaintiff ineligible for UIM benefits under the Allstate policy, while the terms of the Liberty policy clearly

McRae v. St. Michael's Medical Center

349 N.J. Super. 583 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 8, 2002

Plaintiffs proofs established that she had a net annual income prior to the accident of $26,000. … Michael's to $250,000 pursuant to the charitable immunity statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-8.

Baglini v. Lauletta

315 N.J. Super. 225 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 9, 1998

This case differs from Ruberton in that the filing and service of the complaint in the Lauletta action clearly constituted the issuance of process. … Defendant appealed the judgment entered upon jury verdict arguing that the evidence was insufficient to establish the tort of abuse of process. Id.

State v. Porambo

226 N.J. Super. 416 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 1988

Under these circumstances, we conclude that this testimony was not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. See State v. … These arguments are clearly without merit and do not require extended discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). However, we make the following brief comments.

Delcampo v. New Jersey Automobile Full Insurance Underwriting Ass'n

266 N.J. Super. 687 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 15, 1993

Subject the procedures established in the plan of operation, producers shall have authority to issue binders to qualified applicants. … N.J.S.A 17:30E-3(m) (emphasis added) defines the term “qualified applicant” as follows: m.

SABRINA LOSADA VS. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY (L-0057-14, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 24, 2017

Additionally, Princeton qualifies as a public charity under IRC § 170(c). … to fulfill its qualifying purpose.

Gauer v. Essex County Division of Welfare

205 N.J. Super. 592 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 1985

To single out ECWB retirees for such benefits is clearly discriminatory. … Should a governing body determine to pay such insurance premiums, the policy must be applied uniformly to all qualified retirees. [Emphasis supplied.]

Peters Well Drilling Co. v. Hanzula

242 N.J. Super. 16 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 1990

III The first claim is that defendant failed to establish "special damages," an essential element of an action for slander of title. We find that defendant did establish "special damages." … Assoc., 786 P. 2d 1112, 1114 (Colo.Sup.Ct. 1990) (notice of lis pendens enjoys qualified privilege only).

Buteas v. Raritan Lodge No. 61

248 N.J. Super. 351 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 20, 1991

The line between the two is not always clearly defined. … The imputed-negligence defense is conceptually no different from any other personal immunity, and such immunities are recognized as affirmative defenses required to be pleaded. See, e.g., Kolitch v.

Miller v. Domanski

26 N.J. Super. 316 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 18, 1953

The trial court refused to permit the doctor's supplementary qualifying testimony. … The tests shall be made by duly qualified physicians, to be appointed by the court.

Borelli v. Frollani

98 N.J. Super. 203 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 14, 1967

. *206 At the conclusion of the trial the court, on plaintiff's motion, ruled that the undisputed evidence established that defendant was guilty of negligence as a matter of law. … She argues that the evidence clearly showed that defendant was guilty of wanton or willful misconduct in the operation of the motor vehicle when he attempted to elude the police.

State v. Styker

262 N.J. Super. 7 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 19, 1993

The Code "established an entirely new sentencing process. … In reaching this conclusion, we candidly noted that "the Penal Code clearly establishes the severity of the crime as the most important factor to be considered by the sentencing judge." Id. at 475 , 550 A. 2d 171 .

REGINA TASCA VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM (POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

458 N.J. Super. 47 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 28, 2019

Realizing she did not qualify for Service retirement benefits at that time, the Board notes that . . . … N.J.A.C. 17:2- 7.1(b)(7) ("The member's original enrollment date established in the former system shall be transferred into the new system.").

Caballero v. Martinez

376 N.J. Super. 223 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 4, 2004

The claimant must be one intended to be protected and he must clearly *971 demonstrate that he belongs to a class for whose benefit the Fund was established." Sumner v. … In the within matter, however, no proofs were presented that would indicate that the plaintiff intended to establish his domicile in New Jersey.

Schultz v. Kott

131 N.J. Super. 216 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 13, 1974

as well as from the terms of the act itself and prior court construction, the intent of Congress in establishing the APTD program appears clearly to have been to provide assistance for needy persons unable to engage in a … Their expressed concern clearly was deprivation of earning capacity due to medically demonstrable permanent and total disability.

Williams v. Department of Human Services

228 N.J. Super. 529 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 15, 1988

Some recipients also qualify for a grant of food stamps. … The law then establishes a mechanism whereby such public assistance actually is to be provided by municipalities and counties pursuant to guidelines established by the DHS.

Richard W. Berg v. Hon. Christopher J. Christie

436 N.J. Super. 220 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 2014

With respect to the State's Eleventh Amendment immunity, we add that the State may not "be forced to entertain in its own courts suits from which it was immune in federal court . . . ." … Clearly the Legislature was well aware that COLAs were part of the various pension benefit plans.

Kelly v. Bally's Grand, Inc.

285 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 20, 1995

Bally expressed its policy on promotion as follows: It is the policy of Bally's Grand to encourage qualified employees to apply for promotional opportunities and to grant every consideration to qualified in-house candidates … Further, plaintiff facially appears to have been qualified for the position.

Prince v. Garruto, Galex & Cantor

346 N.J. Super. 180 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 27, 2001

Also unaddressed is the defense that omitting Lederle was a sound strategic decision constituting reasonable professional judgment and thus immune from malpractice characterization. See, e.g., Ziegelheim v. … The medical literature clearly confirms that they did not deviate from accepted standards of medical practice in doing so.

Vassallo v. Bell

221 N.J. Super. 347 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 3, 1987

In *371 our view, this clearly so qualifies, and the trial judge erred in failing to recognize this. … While discarding the malice label, because of many meanings which the term has developed, the Court continued to adhere to the principle that to overcome a qualified privilege "a plaintiff must establish that the publisher