Case law

Horwitz v. Reichenstein

15 N.J. 6 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 22, 1954

If so, it is our clear duty to choose that construction which will carry out the legislative intent of the statute as a whole, and that the contention urged by the appellant clearly does not do. … With ward elections, moreover, a qualified person known principally in his own ward will be able to run for ward councilman prior to establishing a citywide reputation. * * * The election of some eouncilmen from wards is

JAIME TAORMINA BISBING VS. GLENN R. BISBING, III (FM-19-0324-14, SUSSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 7, 2021

The Orlowski court, in addressing the enforcement of the counsel fee and forensic accountant awards through a qualified domestic relations order, cited to the holding from In Re Gruber, 436 B.R. 39, 43-44 (Bankr. N.D. … Further, the Gruber court found that even if the counsel fee obligation did not qualify as non- dischargeable under Section 5, it would nevertheless fall within the scope o f a non-dischargeable debt under Section 15.

In re the Suspension or Revocation of the Licenses of Weston

36 N.J. 258 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 18, 1961

They also testified that an optometrist, by education and training, is qualified to perform all the tests. Assuming that all the experts were credible, at best we have here a reasonable difference of opinion. … Clearly the discovery of such departures from the normal would be in the interests of the public welfare. It is not enough to say that other procedures would be more appropriate to that end.

State v. Mucci

25 N.J. 423 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 9, 1957

Ct. 1906), affirming that the limitation cannot be applied where the subject of the inquiry is “composed of many elements, and one witness might be qualified on one element and another witness on another,” or where persuasion … Dean Wigmore affirms, section 762, that “* * * as by this opportunity of inspection the opponent is guarded against imposition clearly apparent, so by cross-examination based on the paper he may further detect circumstances

Neno v. Clinton

167 N.J. 573 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 16, 2001

The court explicitly refused to qualify Kelly as an expert, instead allowing him to offer his opinion as a lay witness. … The improperly admitted testimony was “clearly capable of producing an unjust result,” R. 2:10-2, requiring reversal.

MCINTYRE v. UNITED STATES MARSHAL SERVICE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 10, 2023

; and (4) the Individual Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … WL 2263670, at *8 (unnecessary to address qualified immunity “given that Bivens is not being extended” to the claims at issue); Barry v.

KP, Ex Rel. SC v. Corsey

228 F. Supp. 2d 547 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 30, 2002

Section 1983 provides for the imposition of liability on any person who, acting under color of state law, deprives another of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States. 42 … The Plaintiffs have clearly made a proper claim against Corsey under § 1983. First, he acted under color of state law since the acts of harassment occurred in the course of his employment by the Board .of Education.

Den ex dem. Martin v. Brown

7 N.J.L. 305 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1799

subjects— whenever he endeavors, by the terror of his power, the weight of his authority, or the force of arms, to compel them to a surrender of their essential privileges, instead of protecting them in the exercise of their immunities … America and England were under the authority of the same government, and owed allegiance to one monarch, was considered as a natural born subject of that crown, and entitled, in every part of his dominions, to the rights and immunities

Cobra Products v. Federal Ins. Co.

317 N.J. Super. 392 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 31, 1998

Generally, an insured bears the burden of establishing that a claim is within the basic policy terms. Diamond Shamrock Chemicals v. … Bell clearly was an employee at all times. He initiated the thefts and his dishonesty defeats the coverage.

In re the Presentment Made to the Superior Court

34 N.J. 378 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 21, 1961

The presentment is immune. It is like the ffiit and run’ motorist. Before application can be made to suppress it, it is the subject of public gossip. The damage is done. … Such reprobation clearly tends to deprive Pierce of his good name and to besmirch his character.

Rivkin v. Dover Township Rent Leveling Board

277 N.J. Super. 559 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 8, 1994

On remand, the Board allowed an additional $25,-089.67 in qualifying capital improvements. … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

B. v. O.

50 N.J. 93 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 25, 1967

However, Pennsylvania law clearly does not deny a married woman standing to prosecute an action for support for illegitimate children born or conceived during wedlock. E.g. Commonwealth v. Ludlow, 206 Pa. … We note that under this interpretation the child, whose welfare must be the uppermost consideration, may be wholly deprived of support: the New Jersey putative father is immune from the mother's suit, *100 but the Florida

Rivet v. Office Depot, Inc.

207 F. Supp. 3d 417 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 13, 2016

Typicality and Adequacy The Court must also determine whether Plaintiffs have established typicality and adequacy. … As the Supreme Court has recently stated, “Rule 23(b)(3), as an adventuresome innovation, is designed for situations in which class-action treatment is not as clearly called for.” Comcast v.

State v. Pierce

188 N.J. 155 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 2, 2006

In defendant’s case they clearly were. That determination, based on objective facts gleaned from the record of a defendant’s criminal convictions, may be made by the court. … Rosen, 96 N.Y.2d 329 , 728 N.Y.S.2d 407 , 752 N.E.2d 844 (2001) (finding no constitutional right to jury trial to establish facts of prior conviction).

Christian Science Bd. of Directors v. Evans

191 N.J. Super. 411 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 17, 1983

Although these elements were clearly established in reference to the sale of goods and services, it has been held that such guidelines are equally applicable to religious associations or corporations. … The addition of an independent, or some other qualifying, adjective to the names of well known prior organizations has been held as insufficient to avoid confusion in cases involving both religious and fraternal organizations

WOLF v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 6, 2023

The party seeking to invoke federal jurisdiction bears the burden of establishing its existence. Kehr Packages, Inc. v. Fidelcor, Inc., 926 F.2d 1406, 1409 (3d Cir. 1991). III. … Judicial Immunity and Quasi-Judicial Immunity “It is a well-settled principle of law that judges are generally ‘immune from a suit for money damages’” for actions taken in the performance of their

Pbk v. Board of Educ.

343 N.J. Super. 419 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 2, 2001

Further, as the Board noted in its exceptions, petitioner has not established, nor has he even claimed, that E.Y.' … Clearly it was directed at instances where the student is living with a parent or guardian claiming to be but not actually domiciled in the school district or, alternatively, where a child is placed with a person other than

Cherry v. Cherry

168 N.J. Super. 386 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 30, 1979

The facts established both by the taking of testimony and stipulation of counsel are not complex. Cornelia and Benjamin Cherry were married in 1977. … Cherry's title is clearly superior to that of Sally Hayward, and she is entitled to possession as against her. To the extent that Newman v.

William Cano v. County Concrete Corporation

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 28, 2026

We first address defendant's contention the court erred by holding defendant did not qualify for the "construction industry" exemption. … See R. 2:10-2 ("Any error or omission shall be disregarded . . . unless it is of such a nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result. . . .").

Rotino v. J. P. Scanlon, Inc.

125 N.J.L. 227 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 28, 1940

L. 511, he ruled that, to qualify a medical witness on the question of an increase or decrease of incapacity, he “must know” the employee’s condition at the time of the earlier award, and that, with one exception, the employee … Applying to the evidence the established rule that, where the disability is the product of disease aggravated by accidental injury of the statutory class, it is compensable, the employee has, it seems to me, clearly sustained