Case law

In re N.J.A.C. 17:1-6.4, 17:1-7.5 & 17:1-7.10

454 N.J. Super. 386 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 7, 2018

In general, an eligibility statute provides applicable guidelines for determining whether an applicant qualifies for benefits. … Although we invalidate N.J.A.C. 17:1-7.5(c)(2), (c)(3), and (c)(4), we uphold N.J.A.C. 17:1-7.5(c)(1) because that provision merely establishes that the initial IME will be provided at no cost to the applicant. *941 V.

Waszen v. City of Atlantic City

1 N.J. 272 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 10, 1949

insured for public liability and property damage in designated amounts; and (6) the contractor was required to submit proof with the bid that he had an office in Atlantic County, when heretofore *278 he was only required to establish … This is clearly demonstrated by the fact that prior to the time for the reception of bids on the second letting .

CLUB 35 v. Borough of Sayreville

420 N.J. Super. 231 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 14, 2011

While N.J.S.A. 2C:33-27b authorizes a municipality to prohibit BYOB, Sayreville not only prohibits BYOB in commercial establishments that do not qualify as restaurants under its definition, but also regulates BYOB in restaurants … N.J.S.A. 2C:33-27b permits a municipality to prohibit BYOB either in all unlicensed premises or in all but an objectively, clearly and rationally defined exempted class of unlicensed premises.

Meszaros v. Gransamer

23 N.J. 179 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 14, 1957

The members of the gen *183 eral panel were fully qualified and properly chosen jurors. … And it explains the success of the whole judicial establishment. Procedure has become a practical means to an end.

Mallon v. Prudential Property & Casualty Insurance

688 F. Supp. 997 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 10, 1988

Therefore, an employee may establish a prima facie case of age discrimination indirectly by proving by a preponderance of the evidence that “(1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) … The defendant was clearly aware of the condition of the Holmdel office and made this known to plaintiff.

State v. Savoie

67 N.J. 439 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 16, 1975

The context clearly shows that the prohibited receiving or taking was that for the execution and doing of the officer’s duty and office. … When the culpability sufficient to establish a material element of an offense is not prescribed by law, such element is established if a person acts purposely, knowingly or recklessly with respect thereto. * * * (8) Requirement

Williams v. Bd. of Ed. Deptford Tp.

192 N.J. Super. 31 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 1983

injury under the workers' compensation laws should also qualify under Civil Service regulations. … N.J.S.A. 18A:30-2.1 should not be read to establish a limited period of eligibility running continuously for one year from the date of the accident or even from the first qualifying absence.

State v. Jenewicz

193 N.J. 440 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 28, 2008

The questioning established that Dr. … We found that the prosecutor’s references in Nelson were “clearly improper” and constituted reversible error. Id. at 462 , 803 A.2d 1 .

Allan-Deane Corp. v. Tp. of Bedminster

153 N.J. Super. 114 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 5, 1977

Super. 114 (1977) 379 A.2d 265 ALLAN-DEANE CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION, QUALIFIED TO DO BUSINESS IN THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT, v. … stated purpose of the meeting was "to discuss the Allan-Dean Proposal and its impact on the Somerset Hills Area," the written meeting notice further identifying the three municipalities as the communities "where the long-established

DURHAM v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2025

State prisons qualify as public entities under the ADA. Pa. Dep’t of Corr. v. Yeskey, 524 U.S. 206, 210 (1998). … The ADA claims are dismissed without prejudice on the basis of sovereign immunity.

Atamian v. Supermarkets General Corp.

146 N.J. Super. 149 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 29, 1976

Although they concede that there are exceptions to the general rule of "no duty" where special relationships and/or special circumstances exist, defendants deny that the present facts qualify as an exception. … So restrictive an approach to the recognition of duty was clearly rejected by the Supreme Court in Goldberg , with its elevation of "fairness" as the ultimate question.

James Moran v. Board of Trustees, Police and Firemen's Retirement System

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 25, 2014

Undisputed evidence at the hearing established that firefighting duties were divided between two different units, each of which would arrive at a fire in a different fire truck. 2 Breaking … While this was not a classic "accident" in the sense that the house did not collapse on Moran, nor did he trip while carrying a fire hose, it was clearly an unexpected and undesigned

DIANA ACEVEDO VS. CITY OF MILLVILLE (L-0404-18, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 17, 2021

The trial court granted the City's motion for summary judgment, finding the City immune from liability under N.J.S.A. 59:4-2 because plaintiff failed to present sufficient evidence establishing the depression or hole constitutes … In fact, the evidence establishes that it is not.

Evangelou v. Terzano

298 N.J. Super. 467 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 12, 1997

It shall be and hereby is established that Defendant, Terzano[,] was the agent of Defendant, NJAFIUA; C. The Cross-Motion of Defendant, Terzano, shall be and hereby is dismissed. … In support of its motion, the NJAFIUA argued that insurers, agents, and brokers were immune from liability for failure to advise customers or insureds of additional or increased limits of UM/UIM coverage pursuant to N.J.S.A

Cleary Ex Rel. Cleary v. Waldman

959 F. Supp. 222 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 25, 1997

By virtue of the Eleventh Amendment the State defendants are immune from suits for money damages and have no incentive to consider the retroactive effect of a judgment. … Prior to 1988 the eligibility rules governing spouses forced a couple to liquidate virtually all of their joint resources in order to qualify one of them for Medicaid.

RICHARDSON v. MCCORMICK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 10, 2024

review an IFP plaintiff's complaint and dismiss the complaint if it is frivolous or malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … A plaintiff must establish that (1) she was over forty years old at the time of discharge; (2) she was qualified for the position she was discharged from and was performing her duties satisfactorily; (3) her employment

Ass'n of New Jersey Rifle & Pistol Clubs, Inc. v. Christie

850 F. Supp. 2d 455 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 2, 2012

Moreover, to satisfy the procedural due process analysis, Plaintiffs must not only establish the existence of a protected interest, but also that they have been deprived of that interest. … While Plaintiffs are clearly unhappy with New Jersey’s procedure for obtaining an Exemption to the one-handgun-per-month purchase limitation, the procedural due process protections of the 14th Amendment do not provide Plaintiffs

Szabo v. NJ State Firemen's Ass'n

230 N.J. Super. 265 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 21, 1988

Rules that purport to qualify the right to membership, he claims, are invalid. … That system is clearly contrary to N.J.S.A. 43:17-9 and cannot stand.

United States v. Ewell

252 F. Supp. 2d 104 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 21, 2003

The evidence clearly indicates that the FBI has imposed standards controlling its PCR/ STR testing in accordance with standards *115 set by the industry. … The Qualifications of the Government’s Expert There is no dispute that the Government’s Expert was qualified to testify as such.

COLLINS v. VOLUNTEERS OF AMERICA DELAWARE VALLEY INC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 8, 2025

Plaintiff’s IFP application establishes his financial eligibility to proceed without prepayment of the filing fee and will be granted. I. … A private entity can only qualify as a state actor where it performs a “traditional” and “exclusive public function,” “when the government compels the private entity to take a particular action,” or “when