Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersNJ

10,000+ results

1.13s

  • State v. J.G.

    402 N.J. Super. 290 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 2008

    Defendant asked Brown “to counsel” him but Brown declined because he was too angry with defendant and defendant “needed real psychological help which [Brown] was not qualified to give.” … Clearly, the conversations between defendant and Brown are not protected by the privilege. Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • In Re Gaulkin

    69 N.J. 185 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 28, 1976

    In this state, at least, it has been clearly established that courts do not belong in politics, that the independence of the judiciary depends upon that separation, and that political ties and debts and their accommodation … J. 482 (1970), the Court limited the doctrine of interspousal immunity in a woman’s negligence action against a defendant who became her husband.

    Cited 30 timesPublished
  • Spiegle v. Seaman

    160 N.J. Super. 471 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1978

    The trial judge found plaintiff sufficiently qualified to testify to the title examination he had made on the basis of plaintiff's explanation of his prior experience in the searching of titles. … This, however, was contrary to long-established decisional law on the subject.

    Cited 17 timesPublished
  • Stuhr v. Curran

    44 N.J.L. 181 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 15, 1882

    For so wide a rule they clearly furnish no support whatever. … Even in the event of Cur-ran’s refusal to serve, the law provided for the appointment of an incumbent, who would have served until Stuhr established his title.

    Cited 12 timesPublished
  • STATHUM v. NADROWSKI

    District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2019

    Defendants also argue that Plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, and they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Reply Br.) A. … Remaining Claims The Court declines to reach Defendants’ arguments that Plaintiff failed to exhaust administrative remedies and that Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity because Defendants

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • City of Hoboken v. Kelly

    21 N.J. Misc. 193 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 15, 1943

    The question thus raised must be settled by an application of the doctrine established by this court in Proprietors, &c., ads. … On the contrary, I think it is clearly mandatory. “The purpose of the act was plainly to establish uniform rules in respect to all appeals from the award of commissioners in all cases of condemnation.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Leodori v. Cigna Corp.

    175 N.J. 293 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 13, 2003

    Bd. of Educ., 78 N.J. 122, 140 , 393 A.2d 267 (1978) (declaring that “[t]o be given effect, any such waiver [of statutory rights] must be clearly and unmistakably established”); Paul v. … The “You and CIGNA” handbook qualifies as such a writing. The problem in this case is that the acknowledgment form signed by plaintiff contains no statement that he had agreed to the arbitration provision.

    Cited 125 timesPublished
  • RONALD RAFANELLO VS. JORGE S. TAYLOR- ESQUIVEL (L-3488-15 AND L-1721-17, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 23, 2020

    Taylor Stroud, an AVS representative, advised NAB that A-4397-18T2 6 Taylor-Esquivel would not qualify as … Here, the express language of N.J.S.A. 13:5B-32 and N.J.A.C. 13:60 to 13:60-2.1 clearly establishes a separate statutory scheme for commercial motor vehicles having a registered weight of 10,001 pounds or more, like the

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • South Plainfield Borough v. Kentile Floors, Inc.

    183 N.J. Super. 359 · New Jersey Tax Court · May 15, 1981

    If a change in value occurs the town is free to establish that fact and avoid the operation of the statute. … Upon a motion made by the taxpayer, the statute directs the court to apply the freeze provided neither of the two exceptions contained therein is established.

    Cited 8 timesPublished
  • City of Plainfield v. Public Service Electric and Gas Company

    82 N.J. 245 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 1980

    Otherwise, one would be able to obtain immunity from state regulation by making private contractual arrangements.” See E & E Hauling, Inc. v. … The enforcement or nonenforcement of this statute clearly implicates the proposition that the law is now being inequitably administered.

    Cited 61 timesPublished
  • State of New Jersey v. Anthony L. Gibson

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 19, 2025

    The Sick Time And Outside Employment Policies Do Not Establish Duties Imposed "By Law." B. … Here, defendant was charged in count two under N.J.S.A. 2C:30-2(a), which concerns the commission of a qualifying unauthorized act.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Matter of Registrant GB

    147 N.J. 62 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 11, 1996

    However, the State's evidence is not immunized from challenge simply because the prosecutor can rely on hearsay and non-record facts. … Clearly, a registrant also can raise challenges to the "variable" factors that go into determining the Scale score.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • THERESA TRIOLA VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (PUBLIC EMPLOYEES' RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 26, 2021

    The burden to establish pension eligibility is on the applicant, not the Board. Patterson v. Bd. of Trs., State Police Ret. Sys., 194 N.J. 29, 50-51 (2008). … "[T]he creation of legislation is an essential function of the Legislature, so that sovereign immunity bars the equitable estoppel claim." Berg, 225 N.J. at 280.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Vas v. Roberts

    418 N.J. Super. 509 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 2011

    The compensation herein provided shall be paid to each member upon his qualifying into office as such member . . . . [ N.J.S.A. 52:10A-1 (emphasis added).] … To this end, the Assembly has established by rule a procedure for sanctioning members that requires the establishment by resolution of a six-member committee to serve charges and administer a hearing before reporting its

    Cited 40 timesPublished
  • Howard Sav. Inst. v. TRUSTEES, AMHERST COLLEGE

    61 N.J. Super. 119 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 14, 1960

    establishes that neither defendant, now comprising Kinfolk, was a desirable beneficiary party. … Amherst was shown to be non-sectarian, and the resolution of Amherst clearly belies any other disposition.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Carlisle v. Cooper

    19 N.J. Eq. 256 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Oct 15, 1868

    If the gates were regularly raised in high water, it would not defeat the prescription ; it would only qualify it, and give the right, subject to their being raised in high water. … reached within three or four inches of the cap; but there is no proof at all that these gates were continued in use from 1846 to 1853, and such evidence of their width, if their use was proved, would not be sufficient to establish

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • 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

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Taylor v. AMCOR FLEXIBLES INC.

    669 F. Supp. 2d 501 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 4, 2009

    Prima Facie Case Plaintiff has presented sufficient evidence to establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … Although the PIP did not mention those clients by name, it clearly set as two of Plaintiffs objectives closing new business and acquiring higher value added business.

    Cited 7 timesPublished
  • IZZO v. SOMERSET COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE

    District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 8, 2025

    The third requirement is also clearly met, as state law does not appear to bar Plaintiffs claims from being raised in a state forum. See Gonzalez v. … To establish a RICO claim, Plaintiff must allege “(1) conduct (2) of an enterprise (3) through a pattern (4) of racketeering activity, plus (5) an injury to business or property,” and (6) the racketeering activity must

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • LOCAL 195, IFPTE, AFL-CIO v. State

    176 N.J. Super. 85 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 1980

    The board, in seeking the best qualified candidates for promotions, should not be restricted in its search to the faculty of *93 the North Bergen schools. … Clearly, this case presents the classic conflict described in Woodstown-Pilesgrove, etc., Bd. of Ed. v. Woodstown-Pilesgrove Regional Ed.

    Cited 7 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.