Case law

Paterson Tallow Co. v. Royal Globe Insurance Companies

89 N.J. 24 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 19, 1982

In Lind we emphasized that a malicious prosecution plaintiff must establish each element set forth above, including the “favorable termination” requirement. … IV We hold that for the purpose of determining the existence of coverage under this type of policy, in the absence of any *37 qualifying exclusion or exception the offense of malicious prosecution occurs on the date when

State v. Apprendi

159 N.J. 7 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 24, 1999

What I have tried to establish' — and all that I need to establish — is that on the basis of our jurisprudence to date, the answer to the constitutional question is not clear. … It is the Court’s burden, on the other hand, to establish that its constitutional answer shines forth clearly from our cases.

GITTENS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 18, 2026

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and dismiss any claim which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks relief from an immune defendant. … That Plaintiff filed grievances, reviewed and answered by persons not clearly specified, is not sufficient to support an inference of sufficient discriminatory animus.

Christensen v. New Jersey, Division of Motor Vehicles (In Re Christensen)

95 B.R. 886 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 17, 1988

The DMY is clearly within the scope of this statutory definition. … The Penn Terra court established that the enforcement of Pennsylvania’s environmental laws was clearly an exercise of the state’s police and regulatory power as provided in 11 U.S.C. § 362 (b)(4).

State v. Cross

330 N.J. Super. 516 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 5, 2000

the offense, or (2) the law provides that the state of merit established by such ignorance or mistake constitutes a defense. … The conduct that the Legislature deemed to be a second degree offense is clearly deplorable and should be punished.

Varnum v. Camp

13 N.J.L. 326 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 15, 1833

Kent, while maintaining with his wonted strength, an extension of the rule of international law, which he afterwards in his commentaries admits is inconsistent with the weight of American authority, 2 Com. 330, steadily qualifies … For it is clearly the duty of every state to keep its religion and morals pure, and its institutions entire.” In Edmondstone v.

State v. Butler

32 N.J. 166 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 4, 1960

The alleged meagerness of the corroboration is clearly no ground for reversal in view of the settled law in New Jersey that a jury may convict upon the testimony of an accomplice alone. See State v. … But the weight of the corroborative as well as the other testimony was clearly a factual matter for the jury and the effect of the legal error alleged as to Mrs.

OCEAN COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS v. GREWAL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 29, 2020

Lightfoot, however, the Supreme Court more clearly defined the parameters of the State’s powers over its subdivisions. 364 U.S. 339 (1960). … The Directive is clearly not field preempted by the INA.

Ahlert v. Hasbro, Inc.

325 F. Supp. 2d 509 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 15, 2004

On this basis, although Plaintiffs business is based in Connecticut and the Water Rat originated in Oklahoma, New Jersey clearly has the strongest connection to the case. … Plaintiff’s Water Rat does not qualify as a trade secret under New Jersey’s common law definition, but it may under the UTSA.

Abramowitz v. Kimmelman

203 N.J. Super. 118 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 26, 1985

Virginia State Bd. of Elections, 383 U.S. 663 , 86 S.Ct. 1079 , 16 L.Ed. 2d 169 (1966), in which it invalidated Virginia's statute imposing a poll tax in state elections because it drew lines qualifying the right to vote … We think that Kramer and similar cases are clearly distinguishable from the case before us.

GARDNER v. THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 27, 2019

Nor has Petitioner established that the state court’s adjudication of this claim was contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law. … The state court’s adjudication of this claim was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.

Hopple v. Higbee

23 N.J.L. 342 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1852

Upon the mere question of compensation, the distinction sought to be established is without foundation. … But there are exceptions and qualifications of this rule, as plain and well established as the rule itself.

Harry Brainum, Jr., Inc. v. Shore Air Conditioning & Refrigeration, Inc. (In Re Shore Air Conditioning & Refrigeration, Inc.)

18 B.R. 643 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 26, 1982

. -, 102 S.Ct. 1035 , 71 L.Ed.2d 318 (1981), in which the court held that a debtor’s interest in grain, consisting of possession and a minute ownership interest, was sufficient to qualify it as “property of the estate;” In … Congress could not have intended such a result, but clearly did intend to bring all of a debtor’s equitable interests into the estate in order to avoid such a result.

State ex rel. M.T.S.

129 N.J. 422 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 30, 1992

We then must consider what evidence is probative to establish the commission of a sexual assault. … The term “physical force,” like its companion term “coercion,” acts to qualify the nature and character of the “sexual penetration.”

Shahmoon Ind. Inc. v. United Steelworkers of Amer.

263 F. Supp. 10 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 29, 1966

But it is only when the arbitrator clearly goes beyond the scope of the submission that the courts will interfere. … Shahmoon’s understanding that company policy was involved is clearly indicated by plaintiff's *17 exhibits 2, 6 and 8. See John Wiley & Sons, Inc. v.

Hudson Transit Lines, Inc. v. United States

314 F. Supp. 197 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 9, 1970

Manhattan, with a transportation facility, pursuant to an annual contract, under which rates were payable weekly, with a faster, more reliable, more comfortable, more convenient and more personalized means of transportation, clearly … At the hearing before this Court, it was represented that Monarch was currently operating 19 car pools. . 49 U.S.C. § 307 (a) “* * * [A] certificate shall he issued to any qualified application therefor, authorizing the whole

State v. Vogt

341 N.J. Super. 407 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 25, 2001

[T]he area can clearly be labeled as secluded. There is only one road that leads into Higbee Beach and the area is not easily accessible through neighboring property. … Notwithstanding its upholding of the validity of the ordinance, the court held that the ordinance could not be enforced on Higbee Beach, a site that "is state-owned and regulated and therefore immune from local control under

Gough v. Bell

22 N.J.L. 441 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 1850

Coles, under whom the plaintiff claims, extended to the river, but they were as clearly limited to the edge of the river. … Of course, if so, it is to be understood in a qualified sense, and subject to the public rights of navigation, &c., as already more particularly remarked upon.

Burgese v. Starwood Hotels & Resorts Worldwide, Inc.

101 F. Supp. 3d 414 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 14, 2015

The precedent in this circuit clearly indicates that ‘a RICO enterprise exists where a group of persons associate, formally or informally, with the purpose of conducting illegal activity.’ ” (citations omitted)). … “To establish open-ended continuity, a plaintiff must establish that the predicate acts were the enterprise’s ‘regular way of doing business’ or threaten repetition in the future.” Spadaro, 855 F.Supp.2d at 1351.

State v. Harris

181 N.J. 391 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 19, 2004

From any objective standpoint, the trial transcript reveals that defense counsel clearly achieved that goal. … That would be clearly improper, clearly open up the time frame from birth until present. *492 Call explained that Harris had a right to present evidence that "would make it more likely that [jurors] would extend mercy to