Case law

State of New Jersey v. Gregory Maurer

438 N.J. Super. 402 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 2014

Requirements for admission to Drug Court are clearly defined. The [] Manual outlines two separate tracks for admission into Drug Court. … By its action, the Legislature clearly evinced an intention to rely on a judge's discretion and ability to better determine admission without continuing the prosecutor's right to veto.

Industrial Highway Corp. v. Danielson

796 F. Supp. 121 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 6, 1992

Section 1331, the federal question statute, does not in itself abrogate the United States’ sovereign immunity. Voluntary Purchasing Groups, Inc. v. … Thus, the decision to suspend use of the nationwide permit before any rights have been established under it is not necessarily the Corps’ “last word” on the subject.

Retz v. Mayor & Council of Saddle Brook

134 N.J. Super. 290 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 15, 1975

Thus, it is well established that where property is held by tenancy by the entirety one spouse cannot sign a deed of conveyance without the other’s signature. … The Legislature clearly intended that the full value of a property could be represented on a petition only by the signatures of both tenants by the entirety.

Mountain Hill, LLC v. Middletown Township

353 N.J. Super. 57 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 5, 2002

"All the members of the governing body" does not mean "all members of the governing body who have no conflict and are qualified to vote." … Clearly, the statute is intended to protect property owners who are applicants or neighbors from casual changes in applicable ordinances.

Procanik v. Cillo

206 N.J. Super. 270 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 1985

The court in Davis also established a two-prong inquiry for determining whether the legal practitioner is immunized from liability resulting from honest error in judgment: (1) whether the state of the law was unsettled at … In Davis the law was clearly unsettled.

State v. Jarrett Parker (068966)

216 N.J. 408 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 15, 2014

Despite the assertions by the State and amicus to the contrary, the assistant prosecutor clearly used defendant’s use of a false 19 name for the purpose of establishing defendant’s character … That is, whether the error is “clearly capable of producing an unjust result.” R. 2:10-2.

General Category Scallop Fishermen v. Secretary of United States Department of Commerce

720 F. Supp. 2d 564 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 14, 2010

While there is no legal requirement to establish a control date, the control date’s purpose was to provide fishers with advance notice that they may not qualify for entry into, or full participation in, the general category … in a given management program” that can “establish a range of years during which a potential participant must have been active in a fishery in order to qualify for a quota share.”

Jennings v. Studebaker Corp.

112 N.J. Eq. 591 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Apr 11, 1933

The statute clearly gives to any creditor the right to maintain the suit. … I must assume that the federal courts carefully considered the circumstances and decided that the three men whom it named receivers were properly qualified for the office.

State of New Jersey v. Michael D. Miller

449 N.J. Super. 460 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 2017

sentencing court were not based upon competent and credible evidence in the record; or (3) "the application of the guidelines to the facts of [the] case makes the sentence clearly … However, merger is required when one offense is a lesser-included offense of another and "[i]t is established by proof of the same or less than all the facts required to establish the commission of the offense charged.

State v. Morales

390 N.J. Super. 470 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 9, 2007

These requirements are imposed in order to "establish uniform practices" that will "assure a thorough and meaningful inquiry into jurors' relevant attitudes. . . ." … And while the Directive approves questioning the jurors "either individually, en banc, or a combination of the two," the reference to "en banc" clearly contemplates a jury in the box.

Coons v. American Honda Motor Co., Inc.

96 N.J. 419 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 13, 1984

have relied, * * * or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed * ’ *. … litigants may have relied * * * or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed.”

Ensslin v. Township of North Bergen

275 N.J. Super. 352 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 1994

The New Jersey LAD provides: Unless it can be clearly shown that a person's handicap ... would prevent such person from performing a particular job, it is an unlawful employment practice to deny an otherwise qualified handicapped … That act prohibits discrimination where the employee is "an otherwise qualified handicapped individual[,]" essentially the same phrase as used in N.J.S.A. 10:5-29.1. 29 U.S.C. § 794 . [1] Although the word "qualified" is

Wolpaw v. General Acc. Ins. Co.

272 N.J. Super. 41 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 25, 1994

However, their interests in maximizing the percentage of the other insureds' fault and minimizing their own were clearly in conflict. … With the general abolition of parental immunity, Foldi v.

Toomey v. McCaffrey

116 N.J.L. 364 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 16, 1936

The town of West New York was incorporated under the statute of 1895, “An act for the formation, establishment and government of towns (Comp. … The statute in question clearly embraced those' who hold an office or position that legally existed.

Sarmiento v. Montclair State University

513 F. Supp. 2d 72 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 9, 2007

Plaintiff’s Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case of discriminatory failure to hire under Title VII, Plaintiff must show (1) that he is a member of a protected class; (2) that he sought and was qualified for a … qualified.

Reilly v. Ozzard

33 N.J. 529 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 5, 1960

Rather it establishes the framework of government with such specific restraints as are thought to be of eternal, value and hence worthy of immunity from passing differences of opinion. … The Legislature alone may determine the duties and the interrelation of the public posts it establishes or authorizes to be established.

THE ESTATE OF SUZANNE BARDZELL v. GOMPERTS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 22, 2021

Absolute immunity and investigative actions First, Plaintiff submits that the court “fail[ed] to draw a line” between a prosecutor’s investigative decisions, which it contends are entitled to only qualified … First, Plaintiff cites to N.J.S.A. 59:3-8, which establishes immunity for, inter alia, the institution of judicial proceedings by a public employee. (DE 17-1 at 7).

Goldstein v. Ewing

62 N.J. Eq. 69 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Jun 28, 1901

Ewing to resort to this indebtedness in order to procure the stock necessary to qualify Mr. Collerd, since he had a large number of shares already standing in his name. In fact, it was a mere matter of convenience. … The effect of that evidence upon my mind I have already stated, but I am now clearly of the opinion that the court had no jurisdiction to entertain the proceeding, and that the petition must be dismissed, with costs.

Gilbert v. Tull

145 N.J. Super. 53 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 1976

Clearly, and properly, the regulations impose upon the welfare board the obligation of exploring and explaining to the applicants the kinds of assistance to which they may be entitled. … Its mission is to provide the basic necessities of life to those who do not qualify under one of the categorical assistance programs. Plaintiff here does qualify for the AEDC program.

In re State

453 N.J. Super. 449 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 5, 2018

He argued N.J.S.A. 2C:4-4 to -6 clearly apply to juveniles, and DHS is the appropriate State entity to produce the independent evaluation of competency the Legislature contemplated. … s fitness to proceed, the State cannot secure an adjudication of delinquency, whether by trial or guilty plea, until his competency can be established. See State v. Purnell , 394 N.J. Super. 28 , 47, 925 A.2d 71 (App.