Case law

Garafola v. Rosecliff Realty Co., Inc.

24 N.J. Super. 28 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 1952

Fromer to answer questions propounded of him on the ground that he was not a qualified expert. As stated in Rempfer v. … We are of the opinion that as a prerequisite to admissibility the photograph should have been authenticated by a qualified observer definitely establishing the true reproduction of the conditions existing at the time of the

Espinal v. Arias

391 N.J. Super. 49 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 8, 2007

To succeed in his lawsuit, plaintiff was required to establish that within a reasonable degree of medical probability he sustained permanent injuries as a result of the automobile accident. N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8a. … Said another way, it establishes a threshold for an injured person to sue for noneconomic damages.

State ex rel. Schalk v. Wrightson

58 N.J.L. 50 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1895

All that the Engeman case decided is, that a justice of the Supreme Court was qualified to preside in the trial of an indictment in the Passaic Quarter Sessions. … If we regard substance and not mere form, in neither case could judges, appointed in contravention of the provision of the fundamental law, be qualified to act. .

The Kimberley School v. Town of Montclair

2 N.J. 28 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 4, 1949

In that act the tax exemption to educational institutions was for the first time qualified by the requirement that they be not conducted for profit and, as so qualified, it still continued to be separated from other exemptions … L. 525, 528-529) The quid pro quo is a familiar element of the action of debt, where it has a precise, technical, and long established meaning, 8 Holdsworth, History of English Law 4, 6; Mait *42 land, Forms of Action at

Dowd v. Howell Township

15 N.J. Tax 82 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 16, 1995

Plaintiff maintains that a pending bill to amend the Farmland Assessment Act establishes that grazing is currently a qualifying agricultural use and that grazing and boarding horses differ. *87 Assembly Bill 2520 (1995) and … Quite clearly, the Legislature has recognized that fees for breeding, boarding, and grazing horses cannot, under current law, be considered in determining the $500 minimum income requirement.

DOE v. SMALL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 2, 2023

Qualified immunity focuses on whether a plaintiff’s constitutional rights were violated and how “clearly established” those rights were at the time of the violation. See Pearson, 555 U.S. at 232. … Finding that La’Quetta is entitled to qualified immunity because she did not abuse John Doe herself would put qualified immunity at odds with § 1983 and undermine well-established theories of § 1983 liability.

State v. Jennings

126 N.J. Super. 70 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 30, 1972

[Emphasis added] The court responded it would not "permit" Figone to testify as he "would clearly incriminate himself." … But the foregoing in nowise qualifies the admonitions in Boiardo and Fary , both supra, that only the witness personally may claim the privilege and then only when faced, under oath, with a specific question.

State v. Schamberg

146 N.J. Super. 559 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 11, 1977

Defendant signed a waiver of immunity after being advised that he was a target of an investigation into the East Rutherford Sewerage Authority of which he was a commissioner. … Hart is clearly distinguishable and is not controlling on the facts herein.

GONZALEZ v. BOROUGH OF RED BANK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 28, 2020

Perez has not satisfied the first step of the qualified immunity analysis, at this stage. … Resolution of these questions is critical to any determination of qualified immunity.

State v. Jefimowicz

119 N.J. 152 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 30, 1990

If the record on its face clearly establishes that defendant is a repeat Graves Act offender, a court may sentence defendant to an extended-term sentence. … Because the record clearly establishes defendant’s prior Graves Act conviction, no further hearing was required to clarify or elucidate the nature of that conviction.

Rosenberg v. Tavorath

352 N.J. Super. 385 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 27, 2002

Villa stated that the purpose of his testimony was not to establish the exact dosage or to prove that Tavorath was not well-qualified, but simply to demonstrate that "a change should have been made ... and if ... … For that reason, the standard of care established by Dr.

Jefferson Trust Co. v. the Hoboken Trust Co.

107 N.J. Eq. 310 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 6, 1930

The will was probated by the surrogate of Hudson county, and the executor therein named qualified thereunder. … It is clearly manifest to me from the proofs herein that no gift inter vivos was established by the deposit in question and no trust was thereby created entitling the defendant-administrator's intestate, the alleged beneficiary

LoBiondo v. Schwartz

323 N.J. Super. 391 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 7, 1999

Accordingly whether exercise of that right accords immunity, absolute or qualified, or is merely subject to the actual malice standard of New York Times makes no difference here in respect of this defamation claim since there … We cannot avoid the impression that if there were any qualifying outrageous conduct here, it was certainly not defendant's.

State v. Grundy

136 N.J.L. 96 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 16, 1947

This state has no constitutional provision regarding immunity of a witness from answering questions, the answers to which tend to incriminate him. … It is a recognized policy in the law that an accomplice or co-defendant who assists the state by giving evidence against another may receive some beneficial recognition, the form of which is not thoroughly established.

BELLINGER v. THE CITY OF PERTH AMBOY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 2025

Plaintiff argues that qualified immunity does not shield Defendants because they arrested him without probable cause, in violation of his clearly established constitutional rights. (Opp. at 11-13.) … “Under our precedents, officers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established at

Rubanick v. Witco Chemical Corp.

125 N.J. 421 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 1, 1991

Balis was qualified to offer an opinion on human carcinogenesis generally; (2) that as a non-physician he was not qualified to offer an opinion on a specific patient’s cancer and its possible causal relationship to PCBs; … Judge Mikva continued: [A] cause-effect relationship need not be clearly established by animal or epidemiological studies before a doctor can testify that, in his opinion, such a relationship exists.

Jefferson v. Freeman

296 N.J. Super. 54 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 20, 1996

We hold that the jury instructions regarding this issue were misleading and clearly capable of producing an unjust result. … The erroneous instructions, therefore, were clearly capable of producing the verdict for defendants, and must be reversed as plain error. R. 2:10-2.

In Re Boardwalk Regency Casino License Appl.

180 N.J. Super. 324 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 1981

Nevertheless, it found qualified for a license the corporation and all the persons required to qualify by N.J.S.A. 5:12-85 c and d, except Clifford and Stuart Perlman. … The statutory burden to demonstrate affirmatively the qualifying attributes, whatever they might be, has been expressly and clearly placed on the applicant by the Legislature and is subject to the canon of clear and convincing

N. Jersey Media Group, Inc. v. STATE, DEPT. OF PERSON'L

389 N.J. Super. 527 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 2006

Therefore, the employment application qualifies as a public record under the common law. … In determining the propriety of an award of attorney fees, the court must first determine whether one qualifies as a "prevailing party." Dunn v.

A-25-14 Patricia Delvecchio v. Township of Bridgewater (074936)

224 N.J. 559 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 28, 2016

The question of disability is a medical determination, and the testimony of a qualified witness will assist the jury in making that determination. … the defendant physicians in a medical malpractice case sought to introduce the videotaped depositions of three physicians who had treated the infant plaintiff for seizures, which the plaintiffs claimed were caused by immunizations