 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Genovese v. Genovese, DOCKET NO. A-3930-05T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under N.J.S.A. § 2A:34-23(h), husband's pension assets were properly valued using marriage end-date other than date he filed New Jersey complaint, as his remarriage after his New York divorce judgment -- later reversed on wife's appeal -- was incontrovertible evidence that marriage irretrievably broke down before New Jersey divorce case was filed.
|
|||||
| State of Maine v. SeKap, S.A., DOCKET NO. A-4284-05T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court properly refused to stay enforcement of Maine's domesticated judgments against a cigarette manufacturer, as latter failed to post adequate security, which was required by N.J.S.A. § 2A:49A- 29(a) and (b), even though the manufacturer had raised a due process defense--lack of personal jurisdiction in rendering state--to the judgment.
|
|||||
| State v. Brown, A-7 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: With regard to defendant's trial on assault and other charges, since no governmental compulsion was involved, the State was permitted to cross-examine defendant concerning his pre-arrest silence to challenge his self-defense testimony. Though a limiting instructing on the use of that evidence was required but no plain error occurred.
|
|||||
| State v. Elkwisni, A-24 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: With regard to defendant's trial on robbery and related charges, defendant's right to remain silent was not violated since the prosecutor was permitted to cross-examine defendant concerning inconsistencies between his post-Miranda statement to the police and his testimony at trial in challenging defendant's claim of the defense of duress.
|
|||||
| State v. Terron, DOCKET NO. A-0001-06T4,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was not entitled to gap time credits under N.J.S.A. § 2C:44-5(b)(2) for his absconding conviction, in violation of N.J.S.A. § 2C:29-5(b), because defendant was no longer serving a sentence when sentenced for the absconding offense as the absconding occurred after he was sentenced on a theft conviction.
|
|||||
| State v. Thomas, DOCKET NO. A-6422-04T4,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Trial court erred by imposing a lower sentence than that negotiated between State and defendant pursuant to the Brimage Guidelines and N.J.S.A. § 2C:35-12, as agreement did not, as court believed, violate defendant's constitutional rights by imposing a greater sentence for having invoked his right to a suppression hearing.
|
|||||
| State v. Tucker, A-6 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, April 17, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a murder prosecution, because defendant did not remain silent, but freely related different stories to the police, the State's pointing out of inconsistencies in defendant's statements and other evidence at trial did not constitute an unconstitutional comment on his silence.
|
|||||
| Bedford v. Riello, DOCKET NO. A-5125-04T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Under N.J.S.A. § 45:9-14.5, the scope of chiropractic practice in New Jersey was limited to adjustments of the spinal column; adjustment of knees was not authorized. Thus, in a malpractice case, court erred by not so charging jurors and advising them that adjustment of patient's knee could be considered evidence of deviation from standard of care.
|
|||||
| Murphy v. Implicito, DOCKET NO. A-1773-06T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In the case of a nonconsensual surgery, a patient-plaintiff was held to be permitted to recover for all injuries proximately caused by the performance of the surgery, whether the result of negligence or not, such as for breach of contract, and the defendant was held to bear the burden to segregate the damages caused by the nonconsensual surgery.
|
|||||
| Pacifico v. Pacifico, A-61 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, April 18, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The doctrine of contra proferentem was erroneously applied in a post-judgment divorce proceeding with regard to interpreting a property settlement agreement (PSA) as to the value of the marital home to be used when the parties' youngest was emancipated since there was no single drafter of the PSA nor did unequal bargaining power exist.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
