Case law

Mountain Springs Assn. v. Wilson

81 N.J. Super. 564 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 27, 1963

The facts in the present case are clearly distinguished from Neponsit. Here the covenant did not provide that the grantee would contribute money for the maintenance of the roads, lake or other facilities. … It is also firmly established that the policy of the law is against the imposition of restrictions upon the use and enjoyment of land, and that such restrictions are to be strictly construed.

State v. R.G.D.

208 N.J. Super. 385 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 28, 1986

.” *389 In adopting N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-26 the Legislature clearly showed an intention to deal forcefully with juveniles who commit serious offenses. … Edward Tobe, a highly qualified board certified psychiatrist, experienced in the evaluation and treatment of adjudicated delinquents.

In the Matter of the Civil Commitment of R.F. Svp 490-08

217 N.J. 152 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 19, 2014

The panel concluded “that the record does not support the trial court’s determination that R.F. does not qualify for [SVPA] commitment.” … Moreover, we cannot say that Judge Perretti clearly erred by accepting the opinion of Dr.

Macchi v. Connecticut General Insurance

354 N.J. Super. 64 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 2002

According to that letter, because plaintiff was not “occupying” the Corvette at the time of the accident, she could not qualify as an “insured person.” … That construction would render illusory the term of the policy establishing a $1,000,000 UM/UIM limit. See Cook-Sauvageau v.

Masone v. Levine

382 N.J. Super. 181 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 29, 2005

In fact, the summary judgment record establishes that Grauer knew only what Levine represented to Woodward. … We decline to adopt a rule that an Affidavit of Merit immunizes the firm prosecuting a matter from Rule 1:4-8 sanctions.

Wheatly v. Sook Suh

217 N.J. Super. 233 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1987

Clearly, the parties intended that the mortgage contingency provision in the agreement should relate to the conventional mortgage to be applied for by defendants. … ords and phrases are not to be isolated but related to the context and the contractual scheme as a whole, and given the meaning that comports with the probable intent and purpose; and thus the literal sense of terms may be qualified

Urban Farms, Inc. v. Seel

87 N.J. Super. 177 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 16, 1965

It appears that the president of plaintiff corporation orally informed defendants in January 1964 that an investigation of Jurgensen indicated that the firm was properly qualified and that it could become an approved builder … It is argued that the purchase of a lot from plaintiff by a builder (entitling him to approval) conclusively establishes his interest in this entire undertaking.

ABBOTT BY ABBOTT v. Burke

149 N.J. 145 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 14, 1997

Clearly the delivery of an adequate education requires efficiency in spending. … Once again, the statute does not disclose the basis for those numbers. 24 In order to receive ECPA, a district is required to submit an “operational plan” that must establish qualifying programs by the 2001-2002 school year

McKelway v. Seymour

29 N.J.L. 321 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1862

That whatever part is not found necessary, and shall not be actually so used, shall revert, clearly implying that, if necessary and actually so used, it shall not so revert, although used also for other purposes. 2. … The plaintiff, then, had no right of entry upon the lands, so long as the qualified fee of the water power company remained.

State v. Rahsjahn Courtney(082857)(Somerset County & Statewide)

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 7, 2020

During plea negotiations, the State alerted the court and defendant that defendant qualified for a mandatory extended term under N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(f). … Clearly, Section 12 governed this plea.

KHAWAM v. NEW JERSEY LAWYERS FUND FOR CLIENT PROTECTION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 27, 2025

Absolute immunity is “strong medicine,” and “the presumption is that qualified rather than absolute immunity is sufficient to protect government officials in the exercise of their duties.” … It is the plaintiff’s burden to establish that the defendant’s conduct is “more than the occurrence of isolated or sporadic acts.” Id.

Rosencrans v. Fry

12 N.J. 88 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 30, 1953

The decedent’s widow was named executrix of the will and qualified as such on April 3, 1945, and Ery and the widow qualified on the same day as trustees of the trust created by the 19th paragraph of the will. … Fry qualified as ancillary executor in Florida.

Rouse v. Harris

482 F. Supp. 766 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 14, 1980

Although the statute clearly authorizes the Secretary to permit a party to file an action challenging the Secretary’s final decision more than sixty days from the date of mailing, the court does not believe that the Appeals … Plaintiff’s constitutional argument involves the assertion that the statutory test which illegitimate children must meet to qualify for child’s insurance benefits places a burden on illegitimate children that legitimate children

Casper v. SMG

389 F. Supp. 2d 618 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 5, 2005

“The rule prohibiting experts from providing their legal opinions or conclusions is ‘so well established that it is often deemed a basic premise or assumption of evidence law- a kind of axiomatic principle.’ … A at p. 1) Such proposed testimony is clearly a conclusion of law necessarily resulting from legal analysis.

Estate of Hanges v. Metropolitan Property & Casualty Insurance

202 N.J. 369 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 21, 2010

In *378 respect of whether decedent’s admittedly hearsay statements to the police recorded in the police report qualified for admission, the trial court reasoned that plaintiff had failed to proffer adequate proof that there … Comm. of Manalapan, 140 N.J. 366, 378 , 658 A.2d 1230 (1995), we consistently have held that “[a] trial court’s interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts are not entitled to any

Palamar Const., Inc. v. Tp. of Pennsauken

196 N.J. Super. 241 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 21, 1983

In addition to stating the committee's finding that defendant was a qualified and responsible bidder, the resolution also provided * * * * * * * * 3. … In this instance, however, those salutary principles are clearly inapplicable.

STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. BARRY BERRY STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. KENNETH DANIELS STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. LEVELL BURNETT (17-06-1583, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 7, 2022

That analysis was insufficient, especially with respect to Berry's motion, given that the three defendants clearly operated at different levels of authority within the criminal operation. … The evidence seized from Berry's Sanford Avenue residence, for example, clearly shows his involvement in drug trafficking, but not his supervisory role within the organization.

FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICERS ASSOCIATION v. GREWAL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 2022

Dec. 16, 2010) {noting that states hold onto their “authority in establishing eligibility requirements for qualified retired law enforcement officers”). … § 926C(c), Similarly, the identification requirement is clearly defined under Section 926C(d).

In Re Langhaar

125 N.J. Eq. 374 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 28, 1939

Langhaar, appeal from the transfer inheritance tax levied in respect of the remainder interest of a trust fund established under said will. … Consideration however results in the inevitable conclusion that the clause above underlined was intended to be qualified by the clause "by reason of the failure of any contingency" c., (notwithstanding no comma immediately

State v. Smith

32 N.J. 501 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 23, 1960

Defense counsel were also authorized to engage, at public expense, the services of a qualified physician to study the autopsy report and assist in the preparation and trial of the case. … It was clearly established that she as well as Smith’s wife was among those interviewed during the interval. Part of this time was also taken up by the detectives and defendants eating.