Case law

Pattberg v. Gott

102 N.J. Eq. 371 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 29, 1928

Said instrument was admitted to probate February 2d 1923, and the executor and trustee therein named qualified thereunder. … It is clearly apparent from the proofs that if the testator's will were invalidated complainant's sister would materially benefit thereby.

KIRBY v. BOROUGH OF WOODCLIFF LAKE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 23, 2022

In the December Opinion, the Court clearly explained that Plaintiff could not plausibly plead a Monell custom or practice using only allegations about his personal experience as a pretrial detainee at the Bergen County … Prosecutorial Immunity Finally, the Woodcliff Lake Defendants maintain that the SAC must be dismissed as to Defendant Botta due to the doctrine of prosecutorial immunity.

Monmouth Chrysler-Plymouth, Inc. v. Chrysler Corp.

102 N.J. 485 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 20, 1986

the establishment of the new dealership would be injurious. … That exemption immunizes competitive restraints from antitrust attack to the extent that such restraints constitute “state action or official action directed by a state.” Parker v.

COUSAR v. MORGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 15, 2021

Under the Civil Rights Act, a state prosecuting attorney is immune from liability unless his alleged actions are clearly outside the scope of his jurisdiction Melissa Lynch knew she didn’t have Jurisdiction … App’x at 171–72 (affirming grant of summary judgment to defendants in false arrest § 1983 case on basis of probable cause and qualified immunity where warrant “appears on its face to be valid”); see also Messerschmidt v

SEVERINO v. MIDDLESEX COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 14, 2020

The Court declines to address matters of qualified and absolute immunity at this time. Although “[a] district court should resolve any immunity question al the earliest possible stage of the litigation.” Orsatti v. … Creighton, 483 U.S. 635. 646 n.6 (1987)). the Complaint lacks sufficient particularity for the Court to determine whether Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Orthopaedic Assoc. v. Dept. of Banking

405 N.J. Super. 54 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 20, 2009

AICRA required DOBI to establish "standards for the certification" of MROs. N.J.S.A. 39:6A-5.2(a). … See the standards established in the Alternate Dispute Resolution Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:23A-13.

Committee for a Rickel Alternative v. City of Linden

111 N.J. 192 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 25, 1988

We concluded in Evesham that under N.J.S.A. 40:55D-17, governing bodies reviewing an action by a board of adjustment had the “authority to make a de novo review of the record established before the board and reach its own … Having adopted the zoning ordinance from which the variance is sought, the governing body is perhaps uniquely qualified to determine whether granting the requested variance would substantially impair the ordinance or the

State v. Egan

82 N.J.L. 317 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 23, 1912

duties of their offices because of the failure of one to qualify, and this seems to have been the view of the Court in Rex v. … must assume, having before it the procedure in the English courts upon which plaintiff in error relies, refused to adopt it, but, by the use of language which in its ordinary sense confers the power in the alternative, established

Nicastro v. McIntyre MacHinery America, Ltd.

201 N.J. 48 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 2, 2010

Not only did the court find no evidence establishing a connection between J. McIntyre and this State, but it also concluded that J. … McIntyre may not have known the precise destination of a purchased machine, but it clearly knew or should have known that the products were intended for sale *79 and distribution to customers located anywhere in the United

HERITAGE AT TOWNE LAKE, LLC. v. Planning Bd.

422 N.J. Super. 75 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 23, 2010

The Board contends that Heritage failed to demonstrate that it has a valid final approval to qualify under the conversion statute. … The testimony from Heritage is sufficient to establish that the increase will be minimal. There are no proofs to the contrary.

Archer v. American Water Works Co.

50 N.J. Eq. 33 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · May 15, 1892

Venner & Co., and they were nominally qualified as such directors by transfers to them respectively of shares of the stock subscribed for by the corporators and paid for by Venner & Co. … Some of the special prayers of the bill approach the proper relief, but fall short of stating it clearly. I understand that the bill was not drawn by counsel who represented the complainant at the argument.

State v. Jones

27 N.J. 257 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 2, 1958

It extends to property of every kind and description, and is qualified only by the constitutional prescription that just compensation shall be made. … pleadings and orders filed prior to the trial all indicated that the taking was as of January 3, 1956, and when, for the first time during the trial, the Commissioner suggested a taking on June 13, 1955, the trial judge clearly

Galante v. Teaneck Dept. of Health

70 N.J. Super. 362 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 16, 1961

By an act of the State Legislature approved June 29, 1935 ( L. 1935, c. 307, p. 971; R.S. 45:4A-1-35) the Legislature created and established the State Department of Beauty Culture Control governed by a Board of Beauty Culture … While the ordinance is invalid only as to the provisions relating to beauty shops, the provisions are not clearly severable but so integrated with the provisions relating to the licensing of barber shops, authorized under

River Development Corp. v. Liberty Corp.

51 N.J. Super. 447 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 16, 1958

We are not persuaded that plaintiff has fully established its case in either regard. … Such acts, bearing the form of legislative licenses, are not uncommon, and their effect has been clearly defined.

National Ass'n for the Advancement of Colored People v. North Hudson Regional Fire & Rescue

707 F. Supp. 2d 520 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 23, 2010

Id. *534 The Court turned to the issue of how to define the qualified population. … Wright uses to define “qualified population” are based on the category of firefighter.

Wilkerson v. CO Porter MacHinery Co.

237 N.J. Super. 282 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1989

The real question is whether the product-line theory of successor liability as carved out in Ramirez is so narrow as to exclude (and immunize) a purchaser of assets in bankruptcy. … However, there are four established exceptions to the general rule of corporate successor nonliability in asset acquisitions.

Uricoli v. Police & Fire. Retirem. Sys.

91 N.J. 62 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 5, 1982

This Court has clearly reaffirmed the rule that honorable service is an implicit requirement of every public pension statute, whether or not this conditional term appears in the particular statute. See Masse v. … In this context, a pension can be viewed as “an element in encouraging qualified individuals to enter and remain in public service.” Masse, 87 N.J. at 261 . See generally id. at 259-62 ; Geller v.

State v. J.M.

182 N.J. 402 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 17, 2005

juvenile’s prospects for rehabilitation before the age of nineteen would be unlikely to include admissions as to delinquency or guilt of an offense, Amicus urges that the Legislature must have intended that the statutory immunity … The evidence clearly established that the juvenile and codefendant had no weapons when they entered the gas station, but that codefendant found and used a baseball bat against the attendant.

United States ex rel. Silver v. Omnicare, Inc.

222 F. Supp. 3d 391 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 28, 2016

] to prevail, [that party] must ‘make a showing sufficient to establish the existence of [every] element essential to that party’s case, and on which that party will bear the burden of proof at trial.’ ” Cooper v. … Particularly when the ultimate inquiry is jurisdictional in nature (i.e., Silver bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction), this deficiency matters.

Chad Jordan v. Sweet Haven Farms, LLC

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 2025

On de novo review, "[a] trial court's interpretation of the law and the legal consequences that flow from established facts are not entitled to any special deference." Rowe v. … Rather, defendants' representations were clearly within their control and are reasonably considered ordinary obligations under the Act.