Case law

Brown v. Wildwood Volunteer Fire Co. No. 1

228 N.J. Super. 556 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 30, 1988

The repealed sections related to incorporation of volunteer fire companies and to the rights, powers, privileges, benefits, advantages and immunities of volunteer fire companies. … The statutory provisions clearly grant a volunteer fire company authority to engage in activities such as those in the present case.

Schundler v. Paulsen

340 N.J. Super. 319 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 9, 2001

Finally, Chapter 73 increases both the maximum amount that any qualified candidate may receive from the fund from $2,300,000 to $3,700,000, and the 2001 spending limit for any qualified candidate from $3,800,000 to $5,900,000 … We also discern nothing unreasonable in the classifications established by Chapter 73.

In re N.J.A.C.

450 N.J. Super. 152 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 2017

As we explained in Silver , “[b]y its plain terms,” the 2003 regulation “prescribefd] a two-prong standard to establish misconduct.” Id. at 53 , 61 A.3d 958 . … It is well-established that, when reviewing an agency’s adoption of a regulation on appeal, the scope of review is “both narrow and deferential.”

State v. Parton

251 N.J. Super. 230 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 4, 1991

We conclude that this testimony of dog tracking is admissible when a proper preliminary foundation has been established. There is no reported appellate case in New Jersey dealing with tracking by dogs. … We conclude that these contentions are clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). Affirmed.

State v. R.T.

411 N.J. Super. 35 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 16, 2009

This evidence would be entirely insufficient to establish the extremely high level of intoxication required by the Court to qualify as a defense as well as to create a jury question on defendant’s intoxication. … Not only did the facts not clearly indicate the appropriateness of the intoxication charge, but the instruction impermissibly interfered with defendant’s chosen trial strategy as clearly articulated to the court during the

Menes v. Chubb & Son

101 F. Supp. 3d 427 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 23, 2015

Under this standard, the decision of the administrator “will be overturned only if it is ‘clearly not supported by the evidence in the record or the administrator has failed to comply with the procedures required by the plan … However, “an award of SSD benefits does not in itself establish that an administrator’s decision was arbitrary and capricious.” Id. (internal citation omitted).

BASS v. PURDUE PHARMA L.P.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2021

Plaintiffs allege that Ronald Bass, Sr. was “denied due process to call an expert witness for my defense or to file a motion in limine under the confrontation clause to establish … Judge Linares is also protected by judicial immunity. Dongon, 363 F. App'x at 155.

Kolba v. Kusznier

252 N.J. Super. 53 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 12, 1991

The second policy implicated by this action is a well-established state goal to encourage the growth and cultivation of trees and discourage their wanton destruction. … And, I am of the opinion that sovereign *61 immunity laws would effectively protect public entities against baseless claims.

Hospital Portrait Service Co. v. Taxation Division Director

6 N.J. Tax 305 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 19, 1983

Supplies____ Since plaintiff has not challenged the validity of these regulations, the first question for resolution is whether photographic film qualifies for the exemption as “machinery, apparatus or equipment.” *313 "Photography … It is axiomatic that in seeking the benefit of a tax exemption plaintiff has the burden of establishing that its claim fits clearly within a statutory exemption provision. Container Ring v. Taxation Div.

SARAVIA v. DOE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 28, 2021

Based on his affidavit of indigence and the absence of three qualifying dismissals within 28 U.S.C. … fundamental rule of jurisprudence having so important a bearing upon the construction of the Constitution of the United States that it has become established

Earl v. Winne

14 N.J. 119 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 14, 1953

Such libels are clearly indictable under the common law, our Constitution and R. S. 2:146-1. … Respondent on the other hand contends that a prosecutor, being an officer of the law, has an absolute immunity from such suits.

LM v. State, Div. of Med. Assist. & Health Serv.

140 N.J. 480 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 7, 1995

On that same date, the court entered a Qualified Domestic Relations Order (QDRO) that reflected the provisions of the agreement. … Marx, 265 N.J.Super. 418, 425 , 627 A.2d 691 (Ch.Div.1993) (“Under New Jersey law, pensions are clearly subject to equitable distribution.”); Ryan v.

Smith v. Penta

81 N.J. 65 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 19, 1979

But at that time, she points out, she might not have known who all of the candidates were to be, because someone might qualify as a nominee during the ensuing ten-day period. … Crossovers and independents will not wish to commit themselves to one party until the candidates are clearly identified.” Developments, supra, 88 Harv.L.Rev. at 1169.

Rommer v. United States

268 F. Supp. 740 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 14, 1966

Defendant, on the other hand, in support of the action taken by the Commissioner, contends that while there may have been a literal compliance with the requirements of Section 337, the transactions involved, while unorthodox, establish … To qualify under Section 354, the transferee corporation must acquire “substantially all of the assets” of the transferor corporation, and any stock, securities or other property received by the transferor corporation must

Vitti v. Brown

359 N.J. Super. 40 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 11, 2003

It was *45 clearly contemplated that discovery would ordinarily be completed within the expanded periods allowed under the new rules. … Barbera, 328 N.J.Super. 424 , 746 A.2d 68 (App.Div.2000) (in the context of late filings, attorney *50 carelessness does not qualify as extraordinary circumstances) and Martinelli v.

Deffer v. SHOP-RITE SUPERMARKETS

332 N.J. Super. 540 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 11, 2000

Newman, was qualified to testify, but also allowed defendant to call Dr. Roschelle. Plaintiff does not appeal the court's ruling with respect to Dr. Newman. … Clearly, plaintiff's attorney's obligation is to his client.

MIKANDA v. CALVARY-SPV-I-LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 18, 2024

§1915(e)(2)(B), and dismiss any claim that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or otherwise seeks relief from an immune defendant. … To establish jurisdiction, a pleading must either present a federal claim or trigger the court’s diversity jurisdiction, See Gibson v. Tip Towing & Recovery LLC, No. 23-2919, 2024 WL 658977 at *1 (3d Cir.

Gould v. Winokur

98 N.J. Super. 554 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 12, 1968

Div. 1960) — where it is clear that plaintiff has not established a prima facie case, no purpose is served by prolonging his hope against hope. … Bell, supra , and, more clearly, Becker v. Eisenstodt, supra , and Sanzari v. Rosenfeld, supra .

NEW JERSEY STAFFING ALLIANCE v. FAIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 26, 2023

of Labor & Workforce Development, from liability for damages in their individual capacities, Defendants have already foreshadowed that they will raise a qualified immunity defense, (ECF No. 18 at 13 n.5), that the Court … So, because Plaintiffs have shown that their members “will suffer at least some harm that cannot be compensated through an award of money damages” because of Defendants’ likely Eleventh Amendment and qualified immunities

Savarese v. New Jersey Auto. Full Ins.

235 N.J. Super. 298 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 26, 1989

Rptr. 897 (1984) explained: `[A] statute will not be retroactively applied unless the Legislature clearly intended the law to be retroactive.... … This was clearly consistent with the JUA plan of operations adopted pursuant to N.J.S.A. 17:30E-11 concerning commissions.