Case law

Township of Piscataway v. State Board of Tax Appeals

129 N.J.L. 261 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 21, 1942

The State Board held that, in view of the evidence, the building in question is exempt from taxation as a building actually used for a college within the scope of *262 the statute, R. … We have no hesitation, therefore, in affirming the judgment of the State Board, with costs.

Sellers v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM

399 N.J. Super. 51 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 19, 2008

Board of Regents v. Roth, 408 U.S. 564, 576-577 , 92 S.Ct. 2701 , 33 L.Ed.2d 548 (1972); Battaglia v. Union Cty. … Principles of equitable estoppel may also be applied to the Board for its actions. See Hemsey v. Bd. of Trs., Police & Firemen's Ret.

Charapova v. Board of Education of Township of Edison

196 N.J. 595 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 22, 2008

960 A.2d 394 (2008) 196 N.J. 595 CHARAPOVA v. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOWNSHIP OF EDISON. Supreme Court of New Jersey. October 22, 2008. Petition for certification. Denied.

Vicari v. Bethlehem Township & Hunterdon County Board of Taxation

8 N.J. Tax 513 · New Jersey Tax Court · Oct 2, 1986

King v. Ruckman, 22 N.J.Eq. 551 (E. & A.1871); Locher v. Locher, supra. It was stated in King v. … In Stone v.

New Jersey Bell Telephone Co. v. Board of Review

41 N.J. 64 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 4, 1963

Engleside at West Condominium Ass'n v. Land Use Board

301 N.J. Super. 628 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 1997

Cherney v. Matawan Borough Zoning Board of Adjustment, 221 N.J.Super. 141, 534 A.2d 41 (App.Div.1987); Grancagnola v. Verona Planning Board, 221 N.J.Super. 71, 533 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1987); Jantausch v. … Kramer v. Board, of Adjustment of Sea Girt, 45 N.J. 268 , 212 A.2d 153 (1965). That decision must be made on the basis of what was before the board and not on the basis of a trial de novo. Antonelli v.

Ridgefield Park Education Ass'n v. Ridgefield Park Board of Education

78 N.J. 144 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 2, 1978

In Tp. of West Windsor v. PERC, 78 N. … Local 140 v. Mercer Cty. Impr. Authority, supra; Group Health Insurance v. Howell, supra, 40 N. J. at 445; N. J. Dept. of Trans. v. Brzoska, 139 N. J. Super. 510, 513 (App. Div. 1976).

Brennan v. Board of Education, Jersey City, New Jersey

374 F. Supp. 817 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 19, 1974

Montana State Board of Education, 336 F.Supp. 524 (D.Mont.1972); Hodgson v. San Diego Unified School District (S.D.Cal.1973), 71 CCH Lab.Cases 32, 920; Brennan v. … Hodgson v. Montana State Board of Education, supra, 336 F.Supp. at 525 . 10.

Hemsey v. Board of Trustees, Police & Firemen's Retirement System

196 N.J. 85 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 6, 2008

951 A.2d 1038 (2008) 196 N.J. 85 HEMSEY v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE & FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM. No. C-347 September Term 2007, 61,372. Supreme Court of New Jersey. June 6, 2008. Petition for certification. Granted.

Marques v. New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners

264 N.J. Super. 416 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 21, 1993

Specifically, the board did not find sufficient evidence to prove that either physician acted in a manner which would constitute grounds for any Board action. … Accordingly, the Board has closed its investigation into this matter. The authority of the Board to investigate complaints such as that made by appellant is entirely discretionary. See Beck v.

AMN, Inc. v. Township of South Brunswick Rent Leveling Board

93 N.J. 518 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 12, 1983

and against enforcement of the Board’s resolution. … Assoc. v. City Council, 55 N.J. 86, 101 (1969) (quoting Dvorkin v. Dover Tp., 29 N.J. 303, 315 (1959)); Safeway Trails, Inc. v.

Meyer v. BOARD, TEACHERS'PEN. & ANNUITY FUND

49 N.J. Super. 255 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 13, 1958

MEYER, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF, v. SAMUEL S. SAGOTSKY, EXECUTOR OF THE ESTATE OF CHRISTOPHER H. … Plaintiff can find no case in point by way of authority for her proposition with the possible exception of Shaw v. Board of Administration, 109 Cal. App. 2 d 770, 241 P. 2 d 635 ( Ct. App. 1952).

Township of Morris v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

49 N.J. 194 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 24, 1967

J. 241 (1957); Woodside Homes, Inc. v. Town of Morristown, 26 N. … Compare, City of Texarkana v. Wiggins, 151 Tex. 100 , 246 S. W. 2d 622 (Sup. Ct. 1952). We do not regard In re Glen Rock, supra, or Woodside Homes, Inc. v.

Lehigh Valley Railroad v. Mayor of Jersey City

81 N.J.L. 290 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 19, 1911

Essex Road Board, 8 Id. 335, 338; State, Graham, prosecutor, v. Paterson, Id. 380, 385; Long Branch Commission v. Dobbins, 32 Id. 659), as well as implied in section 13 of the Certiorari act of 1903. Pamph. L., p. 347. … Elizabeth v. Meeker, 16 Vroom 157 , 160. If the assessment appears to be just and fair, but is set aside only for irregularity in procedure, the court may adopt it as its own. Brown v.

Walker v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

83 N.J.L. 695 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 18, 1912

That such an employment judged by the nature of its duties, as shown by a stipulation, is not an office is clear from our decisions which are collected in the opinion recently filed in the case of Fredericks v. … The duties appertaining to the clerkship in question are performed by an agent employed by the board and not by virtue of any office recognized by this act.

Di Paolo v. Passaic County Board of Chosen Freeholders

162 N.J. 572 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 1, 2000

State v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

45 N.J.L. 173 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1883

On proceedings instituted in February, 1882, the Supreme Court in December, 1882, awarded a mandamus, directing the board of chosen freeholders of Hudson' county to insert this sum in the tax levy for 1883, but refused to … The case is similar to, but stronger for the defendants in error than that of Beals v. Supervisors of Amador County, 28 Cal. 449 .

St. Mary's of Mt. Virgin's Church v. Board of Adjustment

14 N.J. Misc. 288 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 23, 1936

On appeal the board of adjustment found that the construction would be in violation of sections III and VI of the zoning ordinance but nevertheless resolved as follows: “Now therefore this Board finds and determines that … A church. * * * No exception shall be made to the provision of this section by the Board of Adjustment.” There are formal returns to the writ by the secretary of the board of adjustment and by the building inspector.

Acquackanonk Water Co. v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners

97 N.J.L. 366 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 1922

There follows the view of the board as to the law, and last my view. … That the board has no power to affect the rates of the East Jersey Water Company because the rates are all regulated by contract, and the board is without jurisdiction to disregard these contracts.

BROWN v. ASTRAZENECA LP

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 28, 2023

King v. Taylor, 694 F.3d 650, 659-61 (6th Cir. 2012). … Brown 2:19-cv-04586 752 Johnny Brown 2:19-cv-04592 753 Todd Brown 2:19-cv-04595 754 Yvonne Abrams