Case law

Keegan v. Estate of Keegan

157 N.J. Super. 279 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 17, 1978

Keegan, his father's executor having renounced, qualified as administrator with the will annexed of his father's estate and as general administrator of his mother's estate and of the estate of his brother Robert Edward Keegan … Keegan simply established an order of death. The order being determined, the right of survivorship applies.

Schmid v. First Camden National Bank, C., Co.

130 N.J. Eq. 254 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 5, 1941

Secundum, Corporations ¶ 5 , c., the distinction between the fundamental concept and the exception is clearly stated. … Furniture Workers Union, c., supra , "are not yet clearly established, but are being staked out slowly by accumulating precedents."

State v. Mayberry

52 N.J. 413 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 23, 1968

This claim was of course clearly rejected by the jury’s finding of murder in the first degree. … Indeed this supported Mayberry’s testimony that there had been a struggle and it was clearly nonprejudicial.

Harrison v. New Jersey Railroad

19 N.J. Eq. 488 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1868

But at the time it is asserted he made this hypo-thecation, he had not even proved the will and thus qualified himself to dispose of any part of the assets of the estate. … Harrison, acted in a manner which clearly showed that hé was in entire.

Amend v. Amend

12 N.J. Super. 425 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 24, 1950

Like any admission out of court, it could be qualified or contradicted by parol evidence." In Dubies v. Manufacturers' Liability Ins. Co., 96 N.J.L. 107 ( Sup. … Accepting the plaintiff's proof as establishing a prima facie case, the problem remains as to whether on the whole case she has sustained the burden of establishing by the preponderance of the evidence that the decedent suffered

Teamsters Local 97 v. State of New Jersey

434 N.J. Super. 393 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 31, 2014

For those reasons, a statute "will not be declared void unless it is clearly repugnant to the Constitution." Trautmann ex rel. Trautmann v. … Legislative immunity guaranteed by the Speech or Debate Clause assures that the speech and conduct of legislators acting within the sphere of legitimate legislative activity will not be made

ROBERT ALAM v. AMERIBUILT CONTRACTORS (DIVISION OF WORKER'S COMPENSATION)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 28, 2022

"[A]lthough persons are entitled to retain qualified counsel of their own choice, there is no right to demand to be represented by an attorney disqualified because of an ethical requirement." Reardon v. … Guided by these well-established legal principles, we conclude the judge erred in finding a conflict between Travelers and Alam.

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECT. DEP'T. v. Ventron Corp.

182 N.J. Super. 210 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 9, 1981

Under the factual circumstances found by the trial judge, as supplemented by other undisputed evidence, the separate corporate form of Wood Ridge, unless pierced, might be a shield behind which Velsicol would be immune from … Clearly, under the act, entities responsible for discharges of hazardous substances are not entitled to indemnification from the Fund. N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.11g(c).

State v. Bulna

46 N.J. Super. 313 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 20, 1957

The jury had before it not only the well-explained opinion of a qualified expert but also the specimens from which he drew his conclusions. … It is true that counsel's purpose was not too clearly articulated in the questions to the witness excluded at the trial, but the trial court refused to hear an explanation of counsel's purpose.

Castrol Inc. v. Pennzoil Co.

799 F. Supp. 424 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 24, 1992

Moreover, the industry has established a series of sequence engine tests to qualify motor oils which include tests for wear protection. … He designed several of the industry “sequence tests” to qualify motor oils, including the Sequence III High Temperature Oil Oxidation Test. Mr.

SAUNDERS, JR. v. ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 14, 2023

To state a claim under the Rehabilitation Act, Plaintiff must show that “‘(1) he is a qualified individual; (2) with a disability; (3) he was excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of the services, programs … In addition, section 504 does not waive sovereign immunity for damages claims against federal agencies. Lane v. Pena, 518 U.S. 187, 196-97 (1996).

IN THE MATTER OF THE GLORIA T. MANN REVOCABLE TRUST (P-000330-18, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 2, 2021

The "investment strategy" employed by [defendant] is clearly not in compliance with the requirements of the Prudent Investor Act, thus violating the Act and forming the basis for a damages award. … Notwithstanding any Trust provision, a trustee has a "duty under subsection[] [(a)] . . . of [N.J.S.A. 3B:31-675] to respond to the request of a qualified beneficiary of an irrevocable trust who has attained the age of

State v. Thomas

322 N.J. Super. 512 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 25, 1999

Judge Barisonek rejected the State's arguments and concluded that the No Early Release Act clearly requires an independent act of force or threat of force against the victim that is additional to the constituent elements … An act of sexual penetration or sexual contact is required to establish an aggravated sexual assault or a sexual assault.

TAYLOR v. JACKSON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 29, 2019

pauperis, a court must review the complaint and dismiss the action if it (i) is frivolous or malicious, (ii) fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … Americans with Disabilities Act To establish a prima face case of discrimination under the ADA, a plaintiff must establish that “(1) he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is otherwise qualified

Howard Savings Institution v. Quatra

38 N.J. Super. 174 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 9, 1955

The plaintiff Howard was named executor and has qualified. The widow contends that the funds remaining in the two accounts should be paid to the executor for distribution under the will. … At page 329 of 285 U.S., at page 362 of 52 S.Ct. : "* * * A rebuttable presumption clearly is a rule of evidence which has the effect of shifting the burden of proof, * * * and it is hard to see how a statutory rebuttable

KIDD v. LOURDES MEDICAL CENTER AT BURLINGTON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 20, 2021

Additionally, a plaintiff must plead facts that would establish a prima facie case of retaliation. Id. at 798. … The Complaint establishes that Plaintiff is an “African American.” (Compl. ¶20.) As an African American, Plaintiff clearly falls within the class of racial minorities that § 1981 was intended to protect.

Bragen v. Hudson County News Co.

168 F. Supp. 231 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 19, 1958

Clearly, Hudson’s refusal to sell is not grounded in any attempt to monopolize since it is undisputed that service would be resumed upon the settlement of the claim for money owing. … Nowhere in the pleadings or depositions before me are there any facts set forth which would establish the second of these two conditions necessary to bring Hudson’s activities within Section 1 of the Sherman Act.

State v. Maguire

84 N.J. 508 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 2, 1980

Since a very substantial proportion of those now in prison will not qualify for resentencing, and therefore will not obtain the advantages of individualization and reduction of disproportionate sentences contemplated by the … The Code establishes a system of grading for virtually every offense.

Oberhand v. Director, Division of Taxation

193 N.J. 558 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 27, 2008

Oberhand) executor and trustee, and established two trusts, a Marital Trust and a Family Trust. … Clearly, the decedents did not have an opportunity to amend their estate plans to avoid the adverse estate tax consequences. The reliance on the previous law by plaintiffs is obvious and clearly to their detriment.

State v. DeRoxtro

327 N.J. Super. 212 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 10, 2000

There are two theories under which a hearsay statement which is admissible because it is against the declarant's penal interest, might justify admission of a related statement which does not, by itself, qualify as a declaration … Clearly, the jurors had every right to accept Hurt's testimony, and it would seem they did precisely that.