|
| |
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.
|
| |
State Courts -
New Jersey - September 15 - September 21, 2006
|
| |
I.E.'s, L.L.C. v. Simmons, DOCKET NO. F-13336-03,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, LAW DIVISION, MIDDLESEX COUNTY, September 15, 2006, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Due to defective service upon three heirs, and after weighing the equities, a judgment of foreclosure on a tax sale certificate was vacated in order to allow the three heirs an opportunity to redeem the property since personal service was made on only one heir in possession, with the bona fide purchaser of value being aware of such possession.
|
|
| |
Toll Bros., Inc. v. Board of Chosen Freeholders of County of Burlington, DOCKET NO. A-4814-03T5, A-4816-03T5, A-6884-03T5,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, September 18, 2006, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: Under N.J.S.A. § 40:55D-42, developer was properly held to its agreement with county to pay more than its pro rata share of off-site improvements even though scope of development was substantially reduced after agreement was executed, as agreement did not contravene an express legislative policy and was not inconsistent with the public interest.
|
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
|
| |
State v. Rountree, DOCKET NO. A-2043-02T1, A-5014-02T1,
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY, APPELLATE DIVISION, September 21, 2006, Decided
View this case - free
|
Overview: In a post-conviction relief (PCR) matter, Apprendi did not apply retroactively to second-offender mandatory extended-term sentences under the Graves Act, N.J.S.A. § 2C:43-6(c), (d), (g), and (h) and N.J.S.A. § 2C:44-3(d). Therefore, defendant's PCR petition was properly denied regarding his sentencing challenge.
|
|
| |
|
| |
Back to Top |
| |
|