Case law

Hahnemann Univ. Hosp. v. Dudnick

292 N.J. Super. 11 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 21, 1996

. *15 Defendant's contentions are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(A) and (E). I. … Plaintiff clearly established the reliability of the bill. The burden then shifted to defendant to offer some evidence that the bill was not reliable. Defendant failed to do so.

Cook v. State

33 N.J.L. 474 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1868

powers of the state, unless by clear and express words, or an implication as strong and conclusive as express words, is one founded on principles that are incontrovertible, and application of which to cases like this is established … Ogden, in delivering the opinion of the court said: “ It is an essential attribute of sovereignty inherent in the people, and not to be abridged in their hands by presumption, but only by positive legislative enactments clearly

New Jersey Division of Youth & Family Services v. L.V.

382 N.J. Super. 582 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 3, 2005

However, as the mother’s antibodies die off and the baby’s immune system matures and produces antibodies to environmental antigens, the child can ultimately test negative for the virus. This is known as seroreversion. … According to that court, the benefit of the proposed treatment was not clearly established by expert testimony. In re Nikolas E., 720 A.2d 562 (Me.1998). Here, DYFS’s expert established the treatment benefit.

Mullen v. Port Authority of New York & New Jersey

100 F. Supp. 2d 249 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 17, 1999

The waiver of sovereign immunity, however, was not unconditional. … Jersey City, 140 N.J.Super. 96 , 100-103, 355 A.2d 214 (Law Div.1976) (“It is a firmly established rule in American jurisprudence that acts in derogation of sovereign immunity are to be strictly construed and that provisions

State v. Oliver

316 N.J. Super. 592 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 18, 1998

POINT III THE STATE FAILED TO ESTABLISH THAT DEFENDANT WAS ELIGIBLE FOR AN EXTENDED TERM OF LIFE IMPRISONMENT WITHOUT PAROLE. … Plain error is reversible only if it is "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. Accordingly, we will reverse only if "the error led the jury to a result it otherwise might not have reached." State v.

De Vesa v. Dorsey

134 N.J. 420 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 23, 1993

The text of the Constitution clearly commits the power of confirmation to the Senate. … However, the immunity of the Speech and Debate Clause is not absolute.

Aitken v. John Hancock Mutual Life Insurance

124 N.J.L. 58 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 25, 1940

S. 26 :6-8 provides that “* * * In the execution of a death certificate, the personal particulars shall be obtained from the person best qualified to supply them. … Had it been it would have established death by disease. The report should not be given an eifect to defeat the proper determination of the case. The judgment is reversed, with costs. For affirmance — -None.

Modern Tool Corp. v. Pennsylvania R. Co.

100 F. Supp. 595 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 25, 1951

However, as that case clearly indicates, the carrier is not an insurer. … From the testimony of these men, of the rigger who unloaded the car, and from the photographs taken of the interior of the car before the machines were unloaded, it was clearly established how the machines were secured.

Jones v. Aluminum Shapes, Inc.

339 N.J. Super. 412 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 23, 2001

Once again, this fact does not establish an issue of fact with regard to bad faith. … Jones can point to no action on the part of Aluminum Shapes which would establish a reasonable basis on which a jury could establish a finding of bad faith failure to engage in the interactive process.

Gorman v. Miner-Edgar Chemical Corp.

16 N.J. Misc. 170 · New Jersey Department of Labor Workmen's Compensation Bureau · Jan 31, 1938

The evidence, however, quite clearly points to the contrary, establishing conclusively that the accident not only caused a severe leg injury with complete impairment of its use, but, more than that, it was the exciting cause … The doctrine of aggravation of a previously impaired physical condition is well established not only in this jurisdiction but in many others.

State v. Calabrese

107 N.J.L. 115 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 20, 1930

All of the names were those of potential jurors and presumably qualified to serve. That some of those thus qualified were not in the box at the time could by no possibility prejudice the defendants. … The evidence of the crime clearly established that at the time of the killing the defendants were engaged in an attempted robbery, so much being admitted by the defendant-witness Calabrese, and it was on this assumption that

Volz v. Civil Service Commission

86 N.J. Super. 268 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 19, 1965

One of the purposes of the civil service system is to provide the best qualified persons to appointing authorities. Borough of Park Ridge v. Salimone, 21 N.J. 28 (1956). … Courts will not interfere with the actions of this Commission, in the exercise of its broad discretion, "unless they are clearly arbitrary and unreasonable." Flanagan v.

Burns v. Edwards

367 N.J. Super. 29 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 17, 2004

The common qualifying requirements for both SSI and SSD is an applicant's disability, consisting of "a medically determinable physical or mental impairment which can be expected to result in death or which has lasted or can … Clearly, 42 U.S.C.A. § 659 (a) exempts non-means-tested federal benefits, "the entitlement to which is based upon remuneration for employment," from execution or garnishment, and retains the sovereign immunity established

Britney Motil v. Wausau Underwriters Insurance Company

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 5, 2024

Defendant posits the declaration and UIM step-down endorsement "clearly and unambiguously demonstrate[d] that [plaintiff's] recovery of UIM benefits was expressly limited." We disagree. … Specifically, the policy could have clarified that the only qualifying "household" was the residence of the named insured and an identified alternate address was excluded.

Estate of Chin v. St. Barnabas Medical Center

160 N.J. 454 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 28, 1999

The record clearly demonstrates that the embolism was the direct result of an incorrect hook-up of the hysteroscope. Ms. Chin’s treating physician, defendant Dr. … The general rule in malpractice cases is that “evidence of a deviation from accepted medical standards must be provided by competent and qualified physicians.” Schueler v.

Brambila v. Board of Review

124 N.J. 425 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 12, 1991

IRCA established a three-step legalization process for two categories of illegal aliens, SAWs and pre-1982 entrants. … Consequently, their time worked and wages earned subsequent to November 6, 1986 (IRCA’s effective date), could be used to establish a claim for benefits.

United States v. Raniere

895 F. Supp. 699 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 24, 1995

The use immunity statute, 18 U.S.C. § 6003 11 , affords “the Depart *708 ment of Justice exclusive authority to grant immunities.” Pillsbury Co. v. Conboy, 459 U.S. 248, 254 , 103 S.Ct. 608, 612 , 74 L.Ed.2d 430 (1983). … Raniere’s request for a protective order or use immunity is denied. 1 .

BOROWSKI v. KEAN UNIVERSITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 12, 2024

On February 15, 2024, this Court issued an opinion and order (“February 2024 Opinion”) dismissing Plaintiff’s Complaint on Eleventh Amendment immunity, qualified immunity, and failure to state a claim grounds pursuant to … established” for qualified immunity purposes.

Hancock v. Singer Manufacturing Co.

62 N.J.L. 289 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 14, 1898

It excludes most clearly the idea that the act of 1846 was to be deemed a part of the Singer charter. … In the case last cited Chief Justice Green declared that this principle must be considered as clearly settled.

Krieger v. City of Jersey

27 N.J. 535 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 27, 1958

Insofar as plaintiff is concerned, the action is clearly arbitrary. If the power to terminate be assumed, still no warrant would exist to cut short the term of the senior incumbent. … S. 2A :8-5 provides that the magistrate “shall serve for a term of 3 years from the date of his appointment and until his successor is appointed and qualified.”