Case law

State v. Crouch

225 N.J. Super. 100 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 16, 1988

The Constitution does not require that sentencing should be a game in which a wrong move by the judge means immunity for the prisoner. See King v. United States, 69 App.D.C. 10 , 98 F. 2d 291, 296 . … In Battle, we clearly noted: The underlying problem here, as we see it, lies in the erroneous concept of the indictment.

Lom-Ran Corp. v. Dept. of Environmental Protection

163 N.J. Super. 376 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 30, 1978

Here the record clearly establishes that prior to imposition of the ban no one had obtained a building permit or other approval covering any construction on the lot in issue. … Our review of the record establishes that the remaining contentions of the appellant are clearly without merit, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(D)(E), and that the order of the Acting Commissioner of the Department of Environmental Protection

FERGUSON v. NOGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 29, 2020

s/Esther Salas__________________ Esther Salas, U.S.D.J. 6 Defendant also argues that he “is entitled to qualified immunity because his conduct did not violate clearly … Amended Complaint is not amendable to a qualified immunity analysis.

Pittston Co. v. Allianz Insurance

795 F. Supp. 678 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 19, 1992

does not afford immunity, foreign states should be treated no differently than private defendants. … Unless the insured’s claim was clearly without merit, there seems no compelling reason to do otherwise.

Geod Corporation v. New Jersey Transit Corporation

746 F. Supp. 2d 642 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 19, 2010

DBEs are more likely than non-DBEs to be pre-qualified for small construction contracts, but are less likely to pre-qualify for larger construction projects. (Pls.’ Ex. 1 at 34.) … Staff from the Procurement Office, which is responsible for reviewing proposals, and engineers would attend in order to clearly explain the project to potential DBEs. (Trial Tr. vol. 2, 89.)

Menake v. Menake

348 N.J. Super. 442 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 22, 2002

Clearly, this pension will not be earned on the 20th anniversary of defendant's entry into the service. … We do not foreclose that possibility in the event, on remand, the parties choose to pursue this issue and establish an appropriate record.

State v. Inhabitants of Trenton

53 N.J.L. 132 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1890

It is obvious, therefore, that a chartered right to hold and use property does not ipso facto carry with it any immunity from police regulation. … A rule of construction to be applied is, that when an ■ordinance is passed upon a matter clearly within a general power, the presumption is in favor of its- reasonableness.

Grieco v. Grieco

38 N.J. Super. 593 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 31, 1956

That which the plaintiff desired to establish is an equitable indebtedness. … She was clearly the principal in the transaction.

GALLOWAY v. CITY OF WEST ORANGE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 28, 2025

However, under New Jersey law, a prosecutor does not enjoy prosecutorial immunity “if it is established that his conduct was outside the scope of his employment or constituted a crime, actual fraud, actual malice, or willful … Ann. § 59:8-9, in turn, provides that a 25 The Township Defendants also assert that they are immune from liability under the qualified immunity doctrine. (Township Br. at 21-27.)

State v. Bradley

174 N.J. Super. 154 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 1980

It was Birdsall’s opinion that Bradley was clearly implying that he was a planner. Bradley, on the other hand, emphatically denied representing himself as a licensed planner to the board. … The trial judge found that the State had failed to establish that the act was violated and dismissed the order to show cause and complaint.

New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency Vs.

441 N.J. Super. 585 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 11, 2015

Applying those principles, the Court held that expert testimony regarding "battered woman's syndrome" was admissible to help establish a claim of self-defense in a homicide case. Id. at 187. … Both professionals were qualified to undertake their respective tasks.

State v. Shabazz

400 N.J. Super. 203 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 21, 2005

For the reasons stated below, the State's motion to permit the use of the "black box" data and expert testimony at time of trial is granted because the State has clearly established, by a high level of proof, the general … The burden to "clearly establish" reliability of the evidence is on the proponent. State v. Harvey, supra, 151 N.J. at 170 , 699 A. 2d 596 (citing State v.

United States v. Far East Conference

94 F. Supp. 900 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 18, 1951

The defendants likewise misconceive the effect of the specific immunity granted by the statute. … It is well established that repeals by implication are not favored. United States Alkali Ass’n v. United States, supra, 325 U.S. 209 , 65 S.Ct. 1120 ; United States v.

Paper Mill Playhouse v. Township of Millburn

7 N.J. Tax 78 · New Jersey Tax Court · Nov 14, 1984

That lot had acquired a character which clearly entitled its owner to exemption from taxation in 1926 and previous years, and, while ceasing to use the premises for a purpose entitling it to exemption would require that it … On the basis of the above, the Paper Mill property continued to qualify for exemption during the years here in dispute.

In re Charles R. Partridge Lumber Co.

215 F. 973 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 1914

In whichever way the liability of the principal is established, it must flow from the act of the principal. … And when established it cannot, on the one hand, be qualified by the secret instructions of the principal, nor, on the other hand, be enlarged by the unauthorized representations of the agent.” [3] Cohic was a special agent

McDarby v. Merck & Co., Inc.

401 N.J. Super. 10 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 29, 2008

Edward Scolnick, the President of Merck's Research Division, wrote an e-mail about the VIGOR data that stated: "The CV events are clearly there." … Although statutory immunity could be claimed by a manufacturer as an affirmative defense, id. at 96 , if immunity were overcome by evidence of fraud, a plaintiff's entire common-law claim would then be recognized.

State v. Turcotte

239 N.J. Super. 285 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 8, 1990

We concluded that nothing in the regulations suggests that off-track racing stables are immune from the administrative search authorized by the regulation. Id. at 285-286 , 428 A. 2d 947 . … Finally, Detective Makuka, assigned and trained to carry out the equine testing procedure, was more qualified to understand and adhere to the stated scope limitations of the regulations than other law enforcement officers

New Jersey Title Insurance v. Caputo

163 N.J. 143 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 22, 2000

times the allowable amount and, in fact, on nine occasions, Caputo met or exceeded the allowable weekly total in just one day, no explanation was offered for failure to file any such report, even though this omission could clearly … It is not established by negligent or careless conduct or by vague suspicion. Likewise, actual knowledge of and complicity in the fiduciary’s misdeeds is not required.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. TYWAUN S. HEDGESPETH (16-07-2215 AND 16-07-2216, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 3, 2020

We noted that "[t]aken in context, 'confined' clearly refers to the custodial portion of a defendant's criminal sentence, and is not a more general reference to any deprivation of physical liberty." … Rule 2:10-2 directs reviewing courts to disregard "[a]ny error or omission . . . unless it is of such a nature as to have been clearly capable of producing an unjust result."

MARLENE WITTER VS. THE LEAGUERS, INC. (L-0074-17, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 5, 2020

Where counsel requests additional time for discovery, they "should establish that he or she did make effective use of the time permitted under the rules." Ibid. … for immunity under the statute.