 |
|
 |
|
|
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.
| Amalgamated Transit Union Local 880 v. NJ Transit Bus Operations, Inc., DOCKET NO. A-3139-04T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Arbitrators ordered fired employees reinstated with back pay. Under 26 U.S.C.S. § 3402(a)(1) and N.J. Stat. Ann. § 54A:7-1(a), employer had to withhold income taxes from back pay award, as test was whether they were paid due to existing employer-employee relationship, not whether they actually performed services for employer for back pay period.
|
|||||
| Gebroe-Hammer Associates, Inc. v. Sebbag, DOCKET NO. A-3225-04T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment awarding a broker real estate commissions pursuant to an oral agreement with an investor who bought a mortgage from bank was affirmed because under N.J. Stat. Ann. § 25:1-16(b), the requirement of a writing did not apply to commissions earned on sales of mortgages (as opposed to sales of real estate).
|
|||||
| Prado v. State, A-33 September Term 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, May 8, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Appellate division erred in affirming a trial court's order requiring the New Jersey Attorney General to defend a state official pursuant to N.J. Stat. Ann. § 59:10A-1 of the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, because N.J. Ct. R. 2:2-3(a)(2) vested the appellate division with exclusive jurisdiction over all state administrative decisions or actions.
|
|||||
| Lederman v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. of America, Inc., DOCKET NO. A-1485-04T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Where plaintiff sued his former employer and former law firm, as parties' agreement required arbitration only of disputes about the agreement's terms or application, the trial court erred in requiring arbitration of plaintiff's fraud, conspiracy, and malpractice claims because those claims did not concern the terms or application of the agreement.
|
|||||
| Lederman v. Prudential Life Ins. Co. of America, Inc., DOCKET NO. A-1449-04T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 9, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Plaintiff accused defendants of fraud and bribery. Sealing court records under N.J. Ct. R. 1:2-1 based on parties' confidentiality agreement was error, as defendants' interest in their contractual rights was insufficient, without showing of serious injury, to overcome presumption in favor of public access, and dispute was matter of public interest.
|
|||||
| B & S Ltd., Inc. v. Elephant & Castle Intern., Inc., DOCKET NO. : UNN-C-71-06,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, CHANCERY DIVISION, UNION COUNTY, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: New Jersey franchisee could not enjoin arbitration in Minnesota of dispute with its Vancouver-based franchisor. To extent New Jersey Franchise Protection Act invalidated arbitral forum selection clauses in franchise agreements, it was preempted by FAA, and franchisee did not show arbitration clause was procedurally or substantively unconscionable.
|
|||||
| In re Calello, D-118 September Term 2005,
SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, May 10, 2006, Filed
View this case - free |
|||||
|
|||||
| In re Dennis, DOCKET NO. A-7106-03T3,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A police officer who began his employment in a federally-supported position in 1978 was not entitled to enrollment in the Police and Firemen's Retirement System until 1981, when he became a permanent employee in a position funded by state or local revenues, as set forth in N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 43:16A-1(2)(a) and 43:16A-3(1).
|
|||||
| State v. Francis, DOCKET NO. A-6635-04T2,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, May 10, 2006, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A prosecutor's use of a grand jury in defendant's capital murder trial for the dominant purpose of obtaining mitigation evidence for preparation of the State's case for the penalty phase of the trial violated the dominant purpose test and constituted prosecutorial misuse of the grand jury as the test applied equally pre- and post-indictment.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
