Case law

Forsyth v. Township of Lacey

167 N.J. Super. 198 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 30, 1978

He also indicated that there may be a title problem in re *201 gard to the land, i. e., if it is established that it is tidal land, ownership would be in the State. … He explained: Sacrifice sale means you’re hard up and can’t keen your taxes uj), or something like that; so, I qualified. Yes, it’s a sacrifice due to the high tax bill.

CAMPS v. SCHOLTZ

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 23, 2020

qualified immunity. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Kuller v. Fire Assn. of Philadelphia

124 N.J. Eq. 473 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Nov 29, 1938

The uncontradicted proof is clearly to the contrary. … In this connection and for that purpose, she testified that, with the exception of the brief occasion on January 8th, 1934, when she conveyed the property to one Moritz Stuhlbach merely for the purpose of enabling him to qualify

Laurence Rothschild v. Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 8, 2024

The judge concluded: [T]here remain[] issues of fact as to whether [the PAL] qualifies as [an entity entitled to charitable immunity]. … The [c]ourt agrees . . . that blanket statements alone are insufficient to establish immunity under the [Charitable Immunity] Act. . . . . . .

RUFINA ASOLUKA UNEZE v. GREYSTONE PARK PSYCHIATRIC HOSPITAL (L-2760-17, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 11, 2022

Greystone is clearly an arm of the State that is not a "person" within the meaning of Section 1983. … Her defamation and false light claims were clearly time-barred.

State v. Koch

256 N.J. Super. 207 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 20, 1991

The Supreme Court has recognized that “[t]he Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which the wrong move by a judge means immunity for the prisoner.” Bozza v. … Sheppard, supra, 125 N.J.Super. at 336 , 310 A.2d 731 , holding that “[i]t is well established that an illegal sentence is correctible at any time ...

Matter of Sussex County Mun. Utilities Authority

198 N.J. Super. 214 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 18, 1985

We are convinced that the words used by the Legislature in N.J.S.A. 40:14B-18 clearly manifest an intent that, other than with respect to those specifically excepted thereby, appointees and employees of utilities authorities … Without particular regard for the honored maxim inclusio unius est exclusio alterius we note with respect the established proposition that "legislative language must not, if reasonably avoidable, be found to be inoperative

State v. Hunt

115 N.J. 330 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 9, 1989

In Ramseur , in Bey (II) , in Williams (II) , and now in this case, the Court refuses to come to grips with the clearly disturbing implications created by using a death-qualified jury. … Thus, “the court ordinarily has a supervening responsibility to charge the jury concerning any version of the offense ‘clearly indicate[d]’ by the evidence to require proper consideration.”

Lewis v. Mayor of Newark

74 N.J.L. 308 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 9, 1907

By an act entitled “An act determining what newspapers shall be qualified to publish legal notices and proceedings,” passed June 13th, 1895 (Pamph. … The authority to pass the ordinance is not questioned; the power to adopt the motion at the time they did was clearly not existing in the common council.

In re the Estate of Zahn

305 N.J. Super. 260 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 21, 1997

If Zahn had survived, his personal estate would be protected until the property was sold and a deficiency established. His testamentary estate should be entitled to no less protection. Cf. Estate of Colquhoun v. … is language in the decedent’s will clearly expressing an intention that the mortgage debt be paid.”

State v. Halsted

39 N.J.L. 402 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1877

Any other construction will make •the limitation, established fof the public protection, wholly •nugatory, and subject to evasion at will. … Bishop, in referring to-these-cases, say-s that the analogies connected with the law of intent sufficiently, establish this-doctrine.

Berkery v. ESTATE OF STUART

412 N.J. Super. 76 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 19, 2010

Plaintiff goes on to argue that none of defendants qualify under New Jersey law as "media defendants." … The book's assertion that the charges were dropped because the legal establishment "had had enough" is clearly an opinion of the author on a matter of public interest and thus not subject to a defamation claim.

L'Hommedieu v. L'Hommedieu

98 N.J. Eq. 554 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Dec 17, 1925

The executor testified to a conversation with his testator, which clearly showed that the latter was much concerned about the future of his son where dominion over money was involved. … upon the defendant Arthur an absolute right of property in the income of his father's estate, but the effect of the testimony would be to entirely change the testamentary disposition so that the legatee would have only a qualified

Carlini v. Velez

947 F. Supp. 2d 482 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 4, 2013

No. 109-171, § 6012 (2005), codified as amendments to 42 U.S.C. § 1396p. 42 U.S.C. § 1396p(c)(l)(G) establishes the general rule that an annuity is an asset. … The Eleventh Amendment “gives the state immunity from an award of retroactive benefits, except for the three months immediately preceding an outcome in [Plaintiffs] favor.” Sorber v.

State v. Jones

57 N.J. Super. 260 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 2, 1959

The prosecution clearly established a strong prima facie case, including the positive identification of Jones as the leader of the holdup party on each of the two occasions for which he was convicted — the Brakefield robbery … Significantly, there was no attempt to establish an alibi through him.

In Re Fortenbach

119 N.J. Super. 124 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 19, 1972

Many persons with arrest records do not even qualify for such a second "trial," since the disclosure of any previous arrests disqualify them pro se and instanter. … Clearly, then, since the statute authorizes, under certain conditions, the expungement of a conviction for "lewdness," a fortiori why not the arrest?

Mayor of Paterson v. Baker

51 N.J. Eq. 49 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1893

yet, in consequence of their negotiability, she may nevertheless dispose of them in such manner as to make them valid in the hands of an innocent third person, and will, *51 in that event, deprive the complainant of the immunity … In this case that fact has been established by the judgment of the supreme court. No fact can be proved by higher evidence. The complainant is entitled to a decree.

Fountain House of New Jersey, Inc. v. Montague Township

13 N.J. Tax 387 · New Jersey Tax Court · Sep 21, 1993

(citation omitted) The undisputed facts of this case establish that ... [taxpayer] and [its corporate parent] failed to meet that prerequisite for a tax exemption. … The benefit to the members was indirect and clearly insufficient to support the claimed exemption. Church Contribution Trust v. Mendham Bor., supra, 9 N.J.Tax at 311 ; Harvey Cedars v. Sisters of Charity of St.

H. v. H.

59 N.J. Super. 227 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 1959

If the rule in adultery cases is applicable by analogy, inclination, opportunity, and, indeed, indulgence are clearly established. Corroboration, by circumstances and tacit admission, is amply made out. … We conclude that the required harmful effect of defendant's behavior has been sufficiently established.

Haack v. Ranieri

83 N.J. Super. 526 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 20, 1964

never qualified. … The court stated the purpose of R.S. 40:87-9 as follows: "* * * The object and policy of the statute are clearly to guard against actual vacancies in the councilmanic body and a construction is required that will effectuate