Case law

KRAYNIAK v. Board of Trustees

412 N.J. Super. 232 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 8, 2010

Super. 232 John KRAYNIAK, Petitioner-Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Public Employees' Retirement System, Respondent-Respondent. DOCKET NO. A-2578-08T3. Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division. … Therefore, the Board's decision is not entitled to deference because appellate courts are "in no way bound by the agency's interpretation of a statute or its determination of a strictly legal issue." Utley v.

Motley v. Borough of Seaside Park Zoning Board of Adjustment

430 N.J. Super. 132 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 4, 2013

Behlen & Bros. v. … v.

Triola v. Board of Trustees

227 N.J. 26 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 2016

Hunter v. Board of Review

230 N.J. 522 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 29, 2017

ORDER It is ORDERED that the motion to stay the Court’s consideration of the petition for certification pending disposition of the appeal in A-35-16 Hunter v. Bd. of Review, Dept. of Labor is granted.

Barney v. Board of Trustees

238 N.J. Super. 556 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 15, 1990

Board of Trustees, 113 N.J. 169 , 549 A. 2d 1213 (1988) and Ciecwisz v. Board of Trustees, 113 N.J. 180 , 549 A. 2d 1218 (1988). To the extent that Quigley v. Board of Trustees, 231 N.J. … Finally, the Quigley analysis is in conflict with the principles discussed in Kane v. Board of Trustees, supra , Maynard v. Board of Trustees, supra , and Ciecwisz v. Board of Trustees, supra .

Flores v. Board of Review

230 N.J. 489 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 2017

Gridco, Inc. v. Zoning Board

167 N.J. Super. 348 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 20, 1979

See Wilcox v. Sway, 69 Cal. App. 2d 560 , 160 P. 2d 154 (D. Ct. App. 1945). In the present case plaintiff’s variance application was an application for development. N. J. S. A. 40:55D-4. … DeFazio v. Haven S. & L. Ass’n, 22 N. J. 511 (1956). Clearly, the intent of the statutory change was to place the responsibility for inaction on the board of adjustment when it fails to act.

McGonnell v. Board of Commissioners

98 N.J.L. 642 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 1923

v. … Same, 75 Id. 349; Neumann v. Hoboken, 82 Id. 275; Schwarz Bros. v. Board of Health, 83 Id. 81; affirmed, 84 Id. 735.

Washington Township Zoning Board of Adjustment v. Washington Township Planning Board

217 N.J. Super. 215 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 15, 1987

Bd. of Adj. v. Service Elec. … In Bergen County v. Port of N.Y.

Stanton v. Board of Education

68 N.J.L. 496 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 10, 1902

Some of the reasons assigned for setting aside these proceedings are disposed of by the opinion delivered at the pres *497 ent term in the case of Rosell v. Board of Education> post p. 498. … Thip certificate is certainly defective, in failing to show, as the School law requires, that the special meeting had been duly ordered by the board of education (Lamb v.

Carew v. Board of Education

230 N.J. 230 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 6, 2017

Shuster v. Board of Review

396 N.J. Super. 240 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 18, 2007

(employer), appeals a final decision of the Board of Review (Board). The Board accepted the findings and opinion of the Appeal Tribunal and disqualified Shuster from receiving *243 unemployment compensation benefits. … Smith v. Ricci, 89 N.J. 514, 525 , 446 A.2d 501 , appeal dismissed sub nom. Smith v. Brandt, 459 U.S. 962 , 103 S.Ct. 286 , 74 L.Ed.2d 272 (1982); City of Newark v. Natural Res.

State v. Board of Health

81 N.J.L. 218 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 6, 1911

State v. Nelson, 66 Minn. 166 ; Nelson v. Minneapolis, 112 Id. 16; City of New Orleans v. Charouleau, 121 La. 890 ; Adams v. Milwaukee, 129 N. W. Rep. 518 ; Limber v. … Valentine v. Englewood, 47 Vroom 509 . Since the decision of Jacobson v.

Logan v. Board of Review

299 N.J. Super. 346 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 7, 1997

However, the claimant was sufficiently involved in the new business that the Board could reasonably find that he was not “available for work” during that period. See Ford v. … Board of Review, 287 N.J.Super. 281, 286 , 670 A.2d 1116 (App.Div.1996); see also Pedalino v. Board of Review, 83 N.J.Super. 449, 452 , 200 A.2d 351 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 43 N.J. 129 , 202 A.2d 702 (1964).

Debell v. Board of Trustees

357 N.J. Super. 461 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 13, 2003

In LePrince v. … In Widdis v. Public Employee Ret.

Lewis v. Board of Review

228 N.J. 500 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 20, 2017

Valenti v. Board of Review

4 N.J. Super. 162 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 8, 1949

Grant Co. v. Board of Review, 129 N.J.L. 402 . … Reger v. Administrator, supra. The court, in the case of Reger v. Administrator, supra, cited with approval by Mr. Justice Heher in Muraski v.

Brown v. Borough of Glen Rock

165 N.J. 598 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 20, 2000

Kennedy v. Board of Trustees

117 N.J. 628 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Sep 6, 1989

George v. Board of Review

117 N.J. 143 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 27, 1989