 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Facto v. Pantagis, DOCKET NO. A-1153-05T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A banquet hall's inability to perform the contract for a wedding reception due to a power failure also relieved the bride and groom of their obligation to pay the contract price; however, the banquet hall was entitled to the value of the services they did provide prior to the power failure.
|
|||||
| In re Civil Commitment of T.J.N., DOCKET NO. A-4857-03T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellant's temporary commitment under the New Jersey Sexually Violent Predator Act did not have to be vacated after subsequent initial commitment hearing; though one of the two certificates necessary for temporary commitment under N.J.S.A. § 30:4-27.28 was inadequate, the State sustained its burden at a subsequent adversarial commitment hearing.
|
|||||
| Malinowski v. Jacobs, A-46 September Term 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Simon v. Rando held that N.J.S.A. §§ 54:5-89.1 and 54:5-98 required investor to intervene in foreclosure action and to pay more than nominal consideration for property in order to redeem tax certificate. Appellate court erred in holding that Rando applied only prospectively, as Rando was not a new rule of law but merely applied existing rules.
|
|||||
| Simon v. Cronecker, A-105/A-106 September Term 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: After the filing of a tax sale foreclosure action, a third-party investor, who acquired a property interest subject to the action, was required to intervene, pursuant to N.J.S.A. §§ 54:5-89.1 and -98. Otherwise, the investor had no right to participate, directly or indirectly, in the redemption process.
|
|||||
| Simon v. Rando, A-121/A-122 September Term 2004,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A third-party investor's redemption of the tax certificates it purchased was invalid under N.J.S.A. §§ 54:5-89.1 and 54:5-98, because the investor acquired its interest post-complaint, without first moving to intervene in tax certificate holders' foreclosure actions.
|
|||||
| Smith v. State, Dept. of Treasury, Div. of Pensions & Benefits, DOCKET NO. A-6002-04T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, January 29, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Public employee was not eligible for accidental disability pension benefits under N.J.S.A. § 43:15A-43, as the traumatic event that caused her disability occurred when she was temporarily employed before becoming member of New Jersey Public Employees' Retirement System (PERS); that she was a PERS member when she applied for benefits was immaterial.
|
|||||
| Davidson v. Slater, A-84 September Term 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 30, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A trial court erred in dismissing plaintiff's personal injury suit, as she was not obliged under the New Jersey Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, N.J.S.A. §§ 39:6A-1.1 to -35, to produce, as part of her prima facie presentation in a non-aggravation case, a comparative analysis in order to satisfy the verbal threshold proof requirements.
|
|||||
| In re Cozzarelli, D-4 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, January 30, 2007, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
