Case law

ROBERT KOEHLER VS. MICHAEL SMITH (L-4693-15, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 1, 2020

The design plan for the project, drafted by the DOT Bureau of Structural Engineering, clearly indicated a minimal vertical clearance of thirteen feet, nine inches for the Ridge Road overpass, but did not propose the placement … Nonetheless, Balgowan asserted if a contractor were uncomfortable with the manner in which the plan was established, the contractor could address signage on its own.

Alexander v. New Jersey Power & Light Co.

21 N.J. 373 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 23, 1956

The Utility sought a surcharge of 5% on newly established rates to recoup a past deficiency in gross revenue. The rate counsel defended the Board’s order in the judicial proceedings; Mr. … That which is clearly implied is as much a part of the law as that which is expressed. Brandon v. Montclair, 124 N. J. L. 135 (Sup. Ct. 1940), affirmed 125 N. J. L. 367 (E. & A. 1940).

River Nile Invalid Coach & Ambulance, Inc. v. Velez

601 F. Supp. 2d 609 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 9, 2009

(B) Has oversight procedures to monitor beneficiary access and complaints and ensure that transportation is timely and that transport personnel are licensed, qualified, competent, and courteous. … River Nile argues that this "contract of adhesion” does "not clearly express that the provider would be waiving a protected property right by entering into the contract.” (Plt.’s Summ. J. Mot. at 15.)

Farmland Dairies, Inc. v. Milk Drivers & Dairy Employees Union Local 680

956 F. Supp. 1190 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 11, 1997

, read as a whole, clearly envision non-arbitrability.” … Section 303 of the LMRA establishes jurisdiction of the district courts over suits for damages suffered because of violations of § 8(b)(4).

JOHNSON v. WARDEN OF CAMDEN COUNTY CORRECTIONAL FACILITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 27, 2021

Based on his affidavit of poverty and the absence of three qualifying dismissals under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g), the Court will grant Plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis pursuant to 28 … Plaintiff has not alleged any facts to establish personal involvement of the warden of CCCF in a constitutional violation. D.

State v. Mellillo

77 N.J.L. 505 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 27, 1908

If the word “necessary” *510 in the language last quoted be qualified as it was in the preceding clause by the words “or reasonably appears to him to be so/’ the error complained of would be cured. … We are speaking now of cases like the present in which the defendant's act of homicide, if the facts to which he testified be believed, was clearly justified.

Paul Revere Life Ins. Co. v. Haas

266 N.J. Super. 35 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 7, 1993

In any event, the analysis under Johnson is clearly not dispositive. … does not have the "except for fraudulent misstatements" phrase, the insured could misrepresent with intent to deceive in his application, wait two years and one day to file a claim despite his intervening disability, thus immunizing

Landano v. Rafferty

670 F. Supp. 570 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 29, 1987

The subjective judgment implicated in a credibility determination is practically immune from the traditional “error” analysis. … Petitioner argues that the mere fact of the investigation is sufficient to establish bias and therefore qualifies as exculpatory evidence. Relying on the court’s reasoning in State v.

NORIEGA v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 15, 2022

It is well established that the United States is not subject to suit for constitutional torts, including the civil rights claims Plaintiff seeks to raise, and is entitled to absolute sovereign immunity. … As explained by the Honorable Kevin McNulty in dismissing the same type of claim brought by another federal pretrial detainee, the standing orders at issue here “were clearly issued in a judicial rather than administrative

DCPP VS. K.K. AND S.C., IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF C.C. (FG-03-0043-19, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 29, 2020

On appeal, K.K. argues the trial judge's conclusion that the Division of Child Protection and Permanency (Division) "clearly and convincingly" established all four prongs of the best interests standard embodied in N.J.S.A … clearly wants to remain permanently in the care of his [resource] mother."

DeSanto v. Rowan University

224 F. Supp. 2d 819 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 22, 2002

A treating physician does not need to be qualified as an expert, pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 702, if he or she is only called as a fact witness, to establish diagnosis or treatment. Heller v. … DeSanto, however, has failed to identify any qualified expert who can establish that Defendants’ conduct proximately caused DeSanto’s medical problems.

Sheen v. Sheen

126 N.J. Eq. 132 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Aug 24, 1939

One doctor gets paid. 2 Bogert 1163 § 373 , says: "Trusts for the maintenance of existing health and the prevention of disease are clearly charitable, and are probably to be classed as eleemosynary. … be divided into six equal shares, each share to be devoted in each year as a prize for the best results achieved during each year in the six classes specified, and to be paid to such man or woman throughout the world who qualified

Bigelow v. Cassedy

26 N.J. Eq. 557 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1875

But even in such case, the general rule must be qualified by limiting it to such securities as continue to exist, and do not by payment become extinguished as to the principal debtor. … By *562 the civil law, when a second creditor paid the prior creditor, or deposited the amount of the debt on his refusal to receive payment, he established his own right.

Exxon Corp. v. Hunt

109 N.J. 110 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 2, 1987

past precedent on which litigants may have relied * * * or by deciding an issue of first impression whose resolution was not clearly foreshadowed * * Chevron Oil Co. v. … President, S. 51 clearly addresses an issue that has hindered State efforts to set up their own superfunds.

FITCH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 7, 2026

Because Plaintiff concedes that Defendants are immune in their official capacities and that he has failed to state a claim for relief as to his grievance and equal protection claims, those claims shall all be dismissed … conduct, even where the transfer was clearly a direct response to protected conduct).

Hodges v. Klein

421 F. Supp. 1224 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 1976

Moreover, while not absolutely immune from personal liability, prison officials do have a qualified immunity from liability as to acts performed within the scope of their official duties. Knell v. … The record discloses no evidence of subjective bad faith, or that any defendant acted with such disregard for the plaintiffs’ clearly established constitutional rights that his actions could be fairly characterized as being

Jersey City v. Armed Realty Corp.

45 N.J. Super. 49 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 25, 1957

The second level use, it is said, qualifies the property for double assessment as property "not used" for carrier purposes under N.J.S.A. 54:29 A -4, supra. … This decision clearly establishes that land in railroad use may not be assessed locally even though a portion of the building resting on it is put to non-carrier purposes.

Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited v. S.A.C.

450 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 2017

Ed. 2d at 544-45, "[i]f the question is whether an individual's contact with an out-of-state party alone can automatically establish sufficient minimum contacts in the other party's home forum, we believe the answer clearly … We held "the evidence established that the funds loaned or extended to Parmalat all originated from Citi." Id. at 438.

Flax v. United States

847 F. Supp. 1183 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 12, 1994

One exception to this waiver of immunity is commonly referred to as the “discretionary function exception.” … Clearly, no policy guideline or regulation could dictate the exact course of pursuit the agents were to take, and this situation demanded that the agents exercise their discretion throughout the entire surveillance.

American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey, Inc. v. County of Hudson

352 N.J. Super. 44 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 12, 2002

More importantly, both cases clearly established that movants are, with liberality, to be afforded reasonable opportunities to cure procedural defects in their motions to intervene. … Manifestly, this case qualifies under the first and third exceptions.