Case law

Fields v. Trustees of Princeton University

28 N.J. Tax 574 · New Jersey Tax Court · Nov 5, 2015

It is firmly established within the body of law related to tax exemptions that “[t]he burden of proof is upon him who asserts a tax exemption to establish the asserted right.” Jamouneau v. … it qualifies for property tax exemption under applicable law, given the more compelling public policy concern here that “all property shall bear its just and equal share of the public burden of taxation.”

RUFFIN v. CASTANO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 21, 2020

First, the plaintiff must establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … To establish a prima facie case of race discrimination under Title VII, a plaintiff must show that she: (1) was a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) suffered an adverse employment action

Karins v. City of Atlantic City

152 N.J. 532 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 18, 1998

Such behavior clearly offends accepted standards of decency. … Under those circumstances, a public employee is not immune from disciplinary proceedings. Connick, supra, 461 U.S. at 147 , 103 S.Ct. at 1687 , 75 L.Ed.2d at 720 .

Chemical Bank New York Trust Co. v. Kingsley

101 N.J. Super. 77 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 22, 1968

A domicile once established continues until it is superseded by a new one. … Pursuant to the authority and the duty thus cast upon him to provide for his ward’s person and property, he duly qualified as guardian.

State v. Rosenberg

144 N.J. Super. 326 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 13, 1976

In Miller the Supreme Court abandoned the requirement established earlier in Memoirs v. Massachusetts, 383 U. S. 413 , 86 S. Ct. 975 , 16 L. … [I] had not considered at least some of the additional points raised by defendants herein, although clearly the court there placed a “limiting construction” on the statute.

OCEAN COUNTY CELLULAR TELE. CO. v. Tp. of Lakewood Bd. of Adjustment

352 N.J. Super. 514 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 3, 2002

The positive criteria require that "special reasons" for granting the variance be established. Sica, supra, 127 N.J. at 156 , 603 A. 2d 30 . … Indeed, during the hearings Board members found Comcast's witnesses to be highly qualified.

GLAESENER v. CITY OF JERSEY CITY

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

Servs., 436 U.S. 658, 694 (1978)) (internal brackets 15 Responding Officers also argue for qualified immunity. Mot. at 14–17. … The Court does not address their qualified immunity arguments at this time given the pleading deficiencies and other grounds for dismissal. omitted).

ANTOINETTE MARRA VS. HOPATCONG SENIOR CENTER (L-0250-18, SUSSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 26, 2019

On appeal, defendants argue plaintiff's motion for leave to file a late notice of tort claim should have been denied because she failed to establish extraordinary circumstances in accordance with the New Jersey Tort Claims … The TCA's "guiding principle" is that "immunity from tort liability is the general rule and liability is the exception." Ibid. (quoting D.D., 213 N.J. at 134).

Cutler v. Borough of Westwood

295 N.J. Super. 344 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 1996

The language only clearly and unambiguously supports Cutler's reading if we ignore the subordinate clause completely. … is automatically acquired by everyone at the first moment of work in the fifth consecutive year, then tenure would always be acquired " on ... the commencement" of the fifth year and there would be no one left who could qualify

Trustees of the Local 478 Trucking & Allied Industries Pension Fund v. Pirozzi

198 N.J. Super. 297 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 22, 1983

Having established the requisite duty, there was no question that there had been a breach. … The court further qualified the Willy standard by imposing a requirement that the cause of action arising from the duty be one nonexistent at common law.

CORREA EX REL. CORREA v. Commissioner of Soc. SEC.

381 F. Supp. 2d 386 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 12, 2004

Statutory Standards To qualify for SSI benefits, a claimant must first establish that he is disabled. 42 U.S.C. § 1382c(a)(3)(C)(i). … In Bums, the Social Security regulation in dispute clearly established the IQ standard for mental retardation as between 60 and 70.

In Re LymeCare, Inc.

301 B.R. 662 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 5, 2003

FEHBP is clearly a "governmental plan" excluded from ERISA requirements. B. Preemption. … The cited regulation clearly prohibits suit against the carriers or the carriers' subcontractors in lieu of the OPM.

Belmont Condominium Ass'n v. Geibel

432 N.J. Super. 52 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 9, 2013

Any changes made to the building should have been inspected, detailed and supervised by qualified professionals. … It is thus clearly implied that interest on the loss suffered by a plaintiff as a result of defendant’s tortious conduct is what was contemplated by the rule. ...

TAYLOR v. SULLIVAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 25, 2019

must review the complaint and dismiss the action if it determines that the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … To establish a prima face case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must demonstrate that (1) he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions

County of Warren v. State

409 N.J. Super. 495 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 4, 2009

With respect to that issue, there were clearly no factual disputes, so we are dealing with a question of law only. … But the second proposition is qualified by limitations which compound the difficulties of one who assails the legislative decision.

Zinberg v. Washington Bancorp, Inc.

138 F.R.D. 397 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 8, 1990

Plaintiff has clearly established that the proposed class is so numerous that joinder would be impracticable. … Plaintiffs counsel is qualified and experienced. In determining whether an action will be vigorously prosecuted, the decisions have stressed the skill and experience of counsel. Lewis v.

State v. Robinson

200 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 22, 2009

The defendant must *8 establish that there was no probable cause supporting the issuance of the warrant or that the search was otherwise unreasonable. [State v. … No doubt, the limitation on the scope of appellate review is not absolute; it is subject to finite, qualified exceptions. See Alan J. Cornblatt, P.A. v.

Best v. C & M Door Controls, Inc.

402 N.J. Super. 229 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 19, 2008

A favorable determination qualifying for allowances under this rule is a verdict or determination at least as favorable to the offeror as the offer or, if a money judgment, is in an amount, excluding allowable prejudgment … City of Hoboken, 196 N.J. 51, 79 , 951 A. 2d 1017 (2008) (defining a prevailing party as "a party who can establish a `causal nexus' between the litigation" and an ultimately favorable result).

Oceanside Charter School v. New Jersey State Department of Education

418 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 14, 2011

The grant solicitations clearly stated that new construction was not to be undertaken with the funds, but petitioner applied for same, knowing that they would be used for the design and construction of buildings and facilities … Otherwise each district would have a “free pass to award contracts, disregard the express language of the PSCL, and claim immunity from having to repay the amount improperly expended.”

State v. DIORIO

422 N.J. Super. 445 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 20, 2011

THE AFFIDAVITS AND TESTIMONY OF [DEFENDANT AND HIS ATTORNEY] ESTABLISH CLEARLY AND CONVINCINGLY THAT THE STATE AND DEFENDANT HAD AGREED TO THE TERMS OF A NEGOTIATED PLEA PRIOR TO THE JANUARY 9, 2002 PROFFER SESSION. B. … At a Kastigar hearing, the State "has the burden of establishing that its *361 evidence is not tainted by information derived from immunized testimony. " State v.