Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
10,000+ results
6.10s
286 N.J. Super. 354 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 9, 1996
Board of Educ. of Manchester, Ocean County v. Raubinger, 78 N.J. … See Mirandi v. Board of Educ. of West Orange, 1989 S.L.D. 3057, 3062; Bodine v. Board of Educ. of Burlington, Burlington County, 1989 S.L.D. 1053, 1058, aff'd by State Bd. of Educ., 1989 S.L.D. 1064.
Cited 2 timesPublishedMahnken v. Board of Chosen Freeholders
62 N.J.L. 404 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 14, 1898
Pennsylvania Railroad Co. v. Righter, 13 Vroom 180 ; Central Railroad Co. v. Moore, 4 Zab. 824; Durant v. Palmer, 5 Dutcher 544; Houston v. Traphagen, 18 Vroom 23 ; Comben v. Belleville Stone Co., 30 Id. 226 ; Whart. … In Durant v.
Cited 9 timesPublished73 N.J.L. 643 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 5, 1906
In Mabon v. … In Browning v. Camden and Woodbury Railroad Co., 3 Gr.
Cited 1 timesPublished67 N.J.L. 512 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 24, 1902
Green v. Cape May , 12 Id. 45; State v. Jersey City, 3 Dutcher 493; Burlington v. Dennison, supra; Foster v. Cape May, supra. … Cape May, &c., Railroad Co. v. *515 Cape May , 8 Stew. Eq. 419; Van Reipen v. Jersey City, 29 Vroom 262 ; Oakley v. Atlantic City, 34 Id. 127; Ryan v. City of Paterson, 37 Id. 533; 2 Dill. Mun.
Cited 1 timesPublished219 F.R.D. 333 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 6, 2004
Grossman v. Schwarz, 125 F.R.D. 376, 381 (S.D.N.Y.1989) (citing Kelly v. San Jose, 114 F.R.D. 653, 658-59 (N.D.Cal.1987)). See also Soto v. … (citing United States v.
Cited 12 timesPublishedLocal Board of Health v. Eastlack
68 N.J.L. 585 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 10, 1902
No nuisance existed on the premises until a case of small-pox broke out in a member of the tenant's family, whose excretions were emptied into the cesspool,'by the direction of the defendant board of health, who also had … The board of health was entirely without power to abrogate this legal rule by authorizing the prosecutor to come and clean out the closet. The judgment is set aside, with costs.
Cited 2 timesPublishedJaclyn Thompson v. Board of Trustees, Teachers'
449 N.J. Super. 478 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 11, 2017
Patterson, supra, 194 N.J. at 45-47 (quoting Brunell v. … See Turner v. Comm'r of Soc.
Cited 36 timesPublishedGalbraith v. Board of Education
152 N.J. 185 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 31, 1997
Certification is granted, and the matter is summarily remanded to the State Board of Education for reconsideration after the parties have been afforded the opportunity to supplement the record in respect of the “reasonableness
Cited 0 timesPublishedBoard of Chosen Freeholders v. State
159 N.J. 565 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 20, 1999
Board of Chosen Freeholders v. State, 311 N.J.Super. 637, 642-43 , 710 A.2d 1060 (Law Div.1997). … Board of Chosen Freeholders v. State, 311 N.J.Super. 587, 589 , 710 A.2d 1035 (App.Div.1998). The panel also focused on the phrase “certain judicial costs.” See ibid.
Cited 27 timesPublished121 N.J. 664 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 30, 1990
Cited 0 timesPublishedDornbusch v. Board of Adjustment
13 N.J. Misc. 779 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 11, 1935
The board of adjustment revoked a permit duly issued by the superintendent of buildings of the city of Newark for an automobile laundry at 793 Sanford avenue. … After the superintendent of buildings issued the permit for the laundry, the work was substantially completed before an appeal was taken to the board.
Cited 1 timesPublished39 N.J. Eq. 123 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1884
Nichols v. Disner, 5 Dutch. 293. The issuing of the execution after Maria Berry’s death without revivor was, at most, merely erroneous. Howard v. Pitt, 1 Salk. 261; Day v. Sharp, 4. Whart. 339; Hughes v. … McCa hill v. Equitable Life Ins. Soc., 11 C. E. Gr. 531; Shultz v. Sanders, 11 Stew. Eq. 154. In this case there was a formal order that the alias execution issue.
Cited 2 timesPublished246 N.J. Super. 467 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 19, 1991
We have no difficulty deferring, as we must, to that sensible interpretation of the encompassing language of the State Board's own regulation. See Metromedia, Inc. v. … Bd. of Educ., et al. v.
Cited 1 timesPublished316 N.J. Super. 94 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 10, 1998
In Gable v. … We also reject the Board’s attempt to analogize this case to Mazza v.
Cited 1 timesPublishedCastellano v. Linden Board of Education
79 N.J. 407 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 9, 1979
the Board and the Linden Educational Association. 3 Eailure on the Board’s part to abide by the terms of such agreement could have subjected the Board to a claim of an unfair labor practice. … argues that the affirmance by the Appellate Division of the finding of sex discrimination herein is contrary to the decision by another panel of the Appellate Division in Gilchrist v.
Cited 30 timesPublished196 N.J. Super. 576 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 30, 1984
This is the holding of Battaglia v. Board of Review, 14 N.J.Super. 24 (App.Div.1951), and Caldwell v. Div. of Unemployment Dis. Ins., 145 N.J.Super. 206 (App.Div.1976). … The Board of Review found that claimant was “fully employed” because he was working between 30 and 40 hours each week.
Cited 1 timesPublishedCumberland County Welfare Board v. Jordan
81 N.J. Super. 406 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 6, 1963
Compare McLaughlin v. New Jersey Civil Service Commission, 137 N. J. L. 338 (Sup. Ct. 1948), affirmed 1 N. … Campbell v. Department of Civil Service, 39 N. J. 556 (1963). We find no sound basis in law or in fact for disturbing the conclusion reached by the Civil Service Commission. The judgment is affirmed.
Cited 1 timesPublished99 N.J. 199 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 13, 1984
Cited 0 timesPublished99 N.J. 189 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 7, 1984
Certification to the Board of Review granted.
Cited 0 timesPublishedRead v. Board of Commissioners
4 N.J. Misc. 203 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 1, 1926
The Road act of 1917 was construed in Gillen v. Essex County Board of Taxation, 91 N. J. … Salem, &c., Co. v. State Board, &c., supra. See, also, Johnson v. Asbury, 58 N. J.
Cited 1 timesPublished
Ask Donna