Case law

Distributec Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection

274 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 12, 1994

for establishment of a new port outside of the defined port areas. … IV All other issues raised by Distributee in this appeal are so clearly without merit that no further discussion is warranted. R. 2:11 — 8(e)(1). Affirmed. Southern Burlington County N.A.A.C.P. v.

First National City Bank v. Taxation Division Director

5 N.J. Tax 310 · New Jersey Tax Court · Mar 23, 1983

Plaintiff’s fiduciary activities in New Jersey preclude it from being qualified for the exemption. The subject facts are distinguishable from those in Diamondhead Corp. v. Taxation Div. … It held that, in such situations, interstate commerce is not immune from tax if the tests are met.

State v. Smith

262 N.J. Super. 487 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 17, 1993

From our review of this record, we conclude that neither of defendant's two premises has been established. First, if HIV cannot possibly be spread by a bite, the evidence at trial did not establish that proposition. … Defendant also suggests how a "better drafter" could have more clearly expressed the meaning he infers.

Charles v. Reno

117 F. Supp. 2d 412 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 9, 2000

Then, if the Court concludes Petitioner does not qualify for derivative citizenship, the Court will evaluate Petitioner’s Equal Protection arguments concerning the constitutionality of the INA provisions. II. … He is a child born out of wedlock, whose paternity has been established by legitimation.

JOSE CRUZ VS. TRUSTEES OF CALVARY BAPTIST CHURCH (L-1286-16, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 5, 2019

We concluded that "[t]he proof [was], therefore, insufficient to establish a level of wrongful conduct that would deprive [the defendants] of the [Act's] immunity." Ibid. … Further, plaintiff points to no case where the condition of the property, in and of itself, was sufficient to establish gross negligence.

<font color="red">DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE</font> TRANSFERRED TO CAMDEN - NEW CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-cv-603

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 22, 2024

Statements that accurately report or summarize the contents of a lawsuit enjoy a qualified immunity that can only be overcome by proof of malice. Arista Records, Inc. v. … In Salzano, for another, the New Jersey Supreme Court held that a newspaper story accurately reporting that a lawsuit had been filed, and summarizing the lawsuit’s allegations, was protected by qualified immunity because

Sterling Davis Dairy v. Freeman

253 F. Supp. 80 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 7, 1965

This circumstance Congress clearly wished to avoid. Under the Act and the milk order the burdens and consequent penalties for failure to abide by the elaborate scheme of reporting fall on the plaintiff. … Cf., discussion supra on the burden of establishing milk classification. 8 .

Sheeran v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

80 N.J. 548 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 17, 1979

Under this test the instant statute clearly passes constitutional muster. Although N. J. S. … These standards render the statute immune from constitutional attack. See, e. g., Avant v. Clifford, supra; Amalgamated Meat Cutters & Butcher Work v. Connolly, 337 F. Supp. 737 (D. D. C. 1971) (three-judge court). B.

Lower Main Street Associates v. New Jersey Housing & Mortgage Finance Agency

114 N.J. 226 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 22, 1989

The relevant portion of the HFA Act provided that [t]he loan shall be subject to an agreement between the agency and the qualified housing sponsor limiting said qualified housing sponsor, and its principals or stockholders … No qualified housing sponsor which is permitted by the provisions of the law under which it is organized or incorporated to earn a return on its investment, nor any of the principals or stockholders of such qualified housing

In re Code Enforcement Officer

349 N.J. Super. 426 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 1, 2002

VII, § 1, 112, the Legislature created the Department of Personnel (Department) as a principal department within the executive branch of government and further established the Merit System Board and Commissioner of Personnel … Based on the outcome of the examination, along with other factors, the Commissioner provides for the establishment, certification, and cancellation of eligible lists of candidates. N.J.S.A. llA:4-4.

In Re the Complaint of Dillahey

733 F. Supp. 874 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 19, 1990

It is submitted, therefore, that for a structure to come within the scope of the statute limiting liability, it should not only qualify as a “vessel” under the more traditional tests but, in addition, it should be engaged … Hence, this court will reluctantly issue a restraining order, and leave to Congress and the Supreme Court the question of the appropriateness of such immunity. An appropriate order will be entered.

Trump v. O'BRIEN

403 N.J. Super. 281 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 24, 2008

Andreoli, 92 Misc. 2d 410 , 400 N.Y.S. 2d 442 (1977), a judge of the New York Supreme Court discussed at length the proofs required for a journalist to establish the confidentiality of his sources. … He stated: Clearly, the "cloak of confidentiality" essential to invocation of the privilege is established ...

HUNGERFORD & TERRY, INC. v. Geschwindt

24 N.J. Super. 385 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 20, 1953

Hungerford were the actual owners of the entire authorized capital stock, of the par value of $100 per share, although some qualifying shares were not registered in their names, the former owning 185 shares and the latter … The assets of the corporation which were acquired prior to June 28, 1928 are now insufficient to establish a value of $375 per share.

Hayes v. Board of Trustees

421 N.J. Super. 43 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 2011

PTSD is a qualifying psychiatric diagnosis of a permanently disabling mental injury that can constitute the basis for ADR benefits. See Brunell v. … Thus, the record establishes that the manifestation was delayed, bringing petitioner's claim within the Crimaldi exception.

Miller v. Township of Wayne

154 N.J. Super. 247 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 18, 1977

The central issue presented in this case for determination is narrow and clearly defined. … The intention of the Legislature is clearly set out in the body of the statute itself.

Reynolds v. Palnut Co.

330 N.J. Super. 162 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 19, 2000

We find that plaintiff established a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge. He was an older worker, qualifying as a number of a protected class. See Greenberg v. … Camden County Vocational & Technical Schs., 310 N.J.Super. 189, 201 , 708 A. 2d 460 (1998) (holding that a forty-eight year old plaintiff was "clearly a member of a protected class").

First Interstate Bank of California v. Great American Veal, Inc. (In Re Great American Veal, Inc.)

59 B.R. 27 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 18, 1985

This clearly was a conversion by GAV of Mid-West’s assets. … Sec. 9-114, it fails to qualify as an exemption.

Berger v. Shapiro

30 N.J. 89 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 1, 1959

J. 438 (1957); Note, “Landowners’ Liability in New Jersey: The Limitation of Traditional Immunities," 12 Rutgers L. Rev. 599 , 610 (1958). … Moreover, in order to bar a recovery as a matter of law it must be conclusively established that such negligence proximately contributed to the plaintiff’s injury. Paolercio v. Wright, 2 N. J. 412, 413, 418 (1949).

State v. Mayor of New Brunswick

47 N.J.L. 479 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1885

In the case in which it was first announced it was clearly correct. It was in the case of Van Riper v. Parsons, 11 Vroom 123 . … For this reason the act was clearly special.

Oswin v. Shaw

250 N.J. Super. 461 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 2, 1991

There is no claim that her activities were limited to an extent qualifying her under this "non-permanent" injury category. … We are struck with the irony that plaintiff's injury clearly is not serious enough to qualify under Type 9 designed to include transitorily serious but "nonpermanent" injuries which disable a person for a substantial period