Case law

Jamouneau v. City of Newark

25 N.J. Misc. 345 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 10, 1947

The Division of Tax Appeals of the Department of Taxation and Finance is not such a qualified judicial body as to pass upon the constitutionality of an act of the legislature. … Such is the remedy that was available to the petitioner and the authority for such a procedure is clearly set forth in the case of Shea v. Ellenstein et al., 118 N. J. L. 438; 193 Atl. Rep. 551 .

RICHARD UNDERHILL VS. BOROUGH OF CALDWELL (L-1631-17, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 2020

To the contrary, the language in the lease agreement in this case more clearly delegates to the tenant the duty to remove snow and ice. … Div. 1998), Judge Dreier questioned the wisdom of the breadth of the snow and ice immunity, but neither the Court nor the Legislature have limited the immunity nor extended the Bligen exception any further to date.

In Re the Suspension or Revocation of the Certificate of Heller

73 N.J. 292 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 20, 1977

Several established pharmacists testified that they were much more guarded in such sales and made substantially fewer of them. … A minor point is the appellants’ contention that the three pharmacists who testified before the Board were not qualified as experts to establish a standard of professional conduct.

Suburban Trust Company v. National Bank of Westfield

211 F. Supp. 694 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 10, 1962

The Comptroller clearly has a visitorial and supervisory function over National banks. His approval of certain contemplated acts by such banks is expressly required. … , the Comptroller is clearly not an indispensable party, because the fact of his approval becomes irrelevant and immaterial to the question presented.

N.A.R., Inc., Etc. v. Eastern Outdoor Furnishings

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 24, 2025

Nonetheless, it is clear the record—even when viewed in a light most favorable to Eastern Outdoor— fails to provide sufficient evidence to establish such a qualifying "written arrangement." … Summary judgment on this pivotal element was appropriately granted, and there is no need to have a jury attempt to make the legal assessment 4 of whether a qualifying written arrangement was established.

Tomkovich v. Public Service Coord. Transp.

61 N.J. Super. 270 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 2, 1960

We are confronted with a new facet of the problem of interspousal immunity under the Joint Tortfeasors Contribution Law, N.J.S. 2 A :53 A -1 et seq. … These cases, in the light of the expanded concept of interspousal immunity reflected by the Koplik case, supra, point to the correct solution here.

CRYMES v. WILD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 29, 2020

The judge “clearly told complainant that Judge Wild told him I was not released, she did not release me as I did not qualify for the HEDS program.” Id. … In determining whether an act qualifies as a “judicial act,” courts look to “the nature of the act itself, i.e., whether it is a function normally performed by a judge, and to the expectation

State v. Ehlers

98 N.J.L. 236 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 20, 1922

So we are brought face to face with the naked proposition, must a verdict of murder in the first *244 degree, where the facts of the murder are clearly proved or admitted, and establish a. willful, deliberate and premeditated … condition, and the doctor had not qualified as an alienist.

Bank of New Jersey v. Abbott

207 N.J. Super. 29 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 23, 1986

Rather, taken together, they merely establish a ceiling which the parties agree should not be exceeded. … The fee was based on Judge Lowengrub’s conclusions that the Trustee was largely immune from liability, and that much of the Trustee’s work consisted of finding others to manage the trust property.

Inhabitants of Bernards v. Allen

61 N.J.L. 228 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1897

The court also excluded the levy of the commissioners for the sujDport of a police force, for the reason that no police force had been established in the township. … This is clearly incompetent.” Cooley Tax., p. 50.

Smith v. Estate of Smith

248 F. Supp. 2d 348 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 19, 2003

A domestic relations order must clearly specify the following four items in order to be considered “qualified”: (1) the name and the last known mailing address (if any) of the participant and the name and mailing address … C, ¶ 2, which incorporates the PSA by reference, clearly constitutes a domestic relations order.

Smith v. the Duncan Co.

137 N.J.L. 489 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 9, 1948

from the allegation in the amended complaint, there is nothing whatever to suggest that the automobile was being driven in the business of the Goshen Mile Track Association and the other evidence of the respondent company, clearly … Although it does not embody many remarks in quotations, it is significant that the investigator placed in quotes phrases designed to afford legal immunity to the respondent. Thus, Mr.

S. Orange-Maplewood Ed. v. Bd. Ed. S. Orange

146 N.J. Super. 457 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 18, 1977

Plaintiff brought this action for specific enforcement of provisions of an agreement relating to *460 sabbatical leave for qualifying teachers. … Sabbatical leave is clearly a term and condition of employment. It is akin to wage and vacation benefits.

State v. Scott M. Cain(074124)

224 N.J. 410 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 2016

The Court concludes that an expert is no better qualified than a juror to determine the defendant’s state of mind. (pp. 22-23) 5. … Although clearly prejudicial, Detective Rothenberger’s testimony did not draw an objection from defense counsel.

Hiering v. Board of Trustees of Public Employees

197 N.J. Super. 14 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 5, 1984

As a veteran, he qualifies under N.J.S.A. 43:15A-61a or b for a retirement allowance of 1/2 of the compensation received during his last year of creditable service. … The conversion from prior vouchered independent contractor provisions for legal services to salaried employee positions is clearly within the discretion of both OCUA and the Borough.

Donevero v. Jersey City Incinerator Auth'y

75 N.J. Super. 217 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 1962

"Under our system, the government is established by and run for all of the people, not for the benefit of any person or group. The profit motive, inherent in the principle of free enterprise, is absent. … It was clearly the understanding and intention of the Constitutional Convention, which drafted the basic State Charter, that no such right to strike on the part of public employees was to be implied from the language used

Valenti v. Board of Review

4 N.J. Super. 162 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 8, 1949

Valenti establish that she was able to and available for work and thus eligible for unemployment compensation benefits, as prescribed by R.S. 43:21-4 (c)? … qualify for benefits it is essential that it appear that the claimant is `able to work' and `available for work.'

Byram Township v. Western World, Inc.

111 N.J. 222 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 1, 1988

The factual findings establish that the actual and only use of the subject property was as managed woodland. … Consequently, based on the facts adduced at trial in this case, the defendants’ properties clearly qualified for farmlands assessment for the tax year 1983.

Lancellotti v. Maryland Cas. Co.

260 N.J. Super. 579 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 11, 1992

Plaintiffs were entitled to insure the earnings and contents as individuals since, clearly, they had an insurable interest in their own business. … Lancellotti is not a qualified expert and because of the previous orders requiring production of experts' reports.

R.C. Maxwell Co. v. Galloway Township

145 N.J. 547 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 30, 1996

Billboards clearly are not used in telecommunications services. … Even if billboards passed the first prong of the subsection (b) test, they would not qualify for the exception because they fail the third part of the test: billboards clearly are structures.