 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co. v. Vizcaino, DOCKET NO. A-2018-06T3,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: As a third party asserted a claim for an intentional assault, which was not covered by insured's liability insurance policy, and a claim for negligence, which was covered, the insurer could refuse to defend, in which case it would have to pay the insured's defense costs and judgment if claim was later determined to have been covered by the policy.
|
|||||
| Portnoff v. New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co., DOCKET NO. A-1442-05T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The collateral source rule, N.J.S.A. § 39:6A-6 of the New Jersey Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, N.J.S.A. §§ 39:6A-1.1 to -35, entitled auto insurer to a setoff against income continuation benefits for permanent total disability workers' compensation benefits its insured was receiving, because both benefits were congruent with each other.
|
|||||
| State v. Miraballes, DOCKET NO. A-0404-05T4,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 25, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In trial for theft of human remains, allowing State's expert to answer hypothetical question was reversible error under N.J.R.E. 702, as hypothetical used defendant's name, and expert was permitted to testify that because of secrecy associated with defendant's religion, a "priestess" of the religion, such as defendant, would not testify truthfully.
|
|||||
| Bruce Paparone, Inc. v. State, DOCKET NO. A-5127-05T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Court erred in ruling that sellers who sold land subject to farmland preservation agreement did not have to sell it to New Jersey State Agriculture Development Committee (SADC); under N.J.S.A. § 4:1C-39(a), whether SADC's offer to purchase land was equivalent in value to seller's contract with buyer was valued as of date that contract was executed.
|
|||||
| Perelman v. Casiello, DOCKET NO. A-2515-05T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In a declaratory action, defendant was found to have purchased his property with knowledge of the restrictive covenants in his chain of title, that the original grantee and grantor intended to burden his land and benefit plaintiff's, and that the right to enforce the covenants transferred to plaintiff with ownership of the property benefited.
|
|||||
| Sciarrotta v. Global Spectrum, DOCKET NO. A-5103-05T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: While netting behind goals and adjoining corners adequately protected spectators during hockey game, to extent pre-game warm-ups entailed greater risks to spectators than risks associated with game itself, Maisonave's limited duty rule might not govern. Thus, suit by spectator who was hit by puck should not have been dismissed on summary judgment.
|
|||||
| State v. Figueroa, A-38 September Term 2006,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, April 26, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A supplemental charge to a jury reporting a deadlock that did not repeat the initial admonitions and that suggested that deliberations were to continue until unanimity was achieved had the coercive effect on the dissenting juror or jurors into agreeing with the aggravated manslaughter verdict and constituted reversible error.
|
|||||
| Connecticut Indem. Co. v. Podeszwa, DOCKET NO. A-5982-04T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Public policy considerations did not prevent an insurer of a tractor-truck from excluding from liability coverage all losses sustained by third parties in an accident with the truck while it was being used for business purposes as the truck was covered by an additional policy for business use, thus N.J.S.A. § 39:6B-1 nor public policy was violated.
|
|||||
| Township of Dover v. Scuorzo, DOCKET NOS. A-2843-05T5, A-3036-05T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, April 27, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: The real estate taxation deduction granted to veterans who were in active service in time of war under N.J.S.A. § 54:4-8.11, and the disability exemption from real estate taxation granted to veterans, pursuant to N.J.S.A. § 54:4-3.30, were not available to veterans who only trained in the National Guard or Reserves.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
