Matthews factors (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

Matthews factors in New Jersey

5 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1988–2017 0 in the last five years

The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.

Followed or applied (1)

CaseFollowedCited
In the Matter of the Adoption of a Child by J.E.V.Andgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2015 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2016–2016
2 sentences

2016In considering the first factor of the Matthews test, we recognize that a parent's private interest in maintaining some relationship with his or her children is "far more precious than any property right." In re Adoption of J.E.V., 442 N.J.

2016In considering the first factor of the Matthews test, we recognize that a parent's private interest in maintaining some relationship with his or her children is "far more precious than any property right." In re Adoption of J.E.V., 442 N.J.

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Petersen v. Meggitt green
njsuperctappdiv · 2009
1 sentence

2017Under Rule 2:5- 1 We denied Matthews's motion for leave to appeal the May 29 order. 5 A-1454-15T1 1(f)(3)(A), "'it is only the orders designated in the notice of appeal that are subject to the appeal process and review.'" Petersen v. Meggitt, 407 N.J.

12017–2017
Santosky v. Kramer green
scotus · 1982
2 sentences

2016Compared to the other Matthews factors, "[i]n parental rights termination proceedings, the private interest affected is commanding." Santosky, supra, 455 U.S. at 758 , 102 S. Ct. at 1397 , 71 L.

2016Compared to the other Matthews factors, "[i]n parental rights termination proceedings, the private interest affected is commanding." Santosky, supra, 455 U.S. at 758 , 102 S. Ct. at 1397 , 71 L.

12016–2016
Division of Youth and Family Services v. MYJP green
njsuperctappdiv · 2003
2 sentences

2016Under the Matthews balancing test, the court must carefully balance the following three factors: (1) "the private interest that will be affected by the official action"; (2) "the risk that there will be an erroneous deprivation of the interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards"; and (3) "the governmental interest involved, including the added fiscal and administrative burdens that additional or substitute procedures would require." Ibid.

2016Under the Matthews balancing test, the court must carefully balance the following three factors: (1) "the private interest that will be affected by the official action"; (2) "the risk that there will be an erroneous deprivation of the interest through the procedures used, and the probable value, if any, of additional or substitute procedural safeguards"; and (3) "the governmental interest involved, including the added fiscal and administrative burdens that additional or substitute procedures would require." Ibid.

12016–2016
Raleigh Avenue Beach Ass'n v. Atlantis Beach Club, Inc. green
nj · 2005
2 sentences

2008In reaching this conclusion, the Court relied on various circumstances pertinent to the right of public access to a privately-owned beach under the Matthews factors, including the absence of a publicly-owned beach in the municipality where the club was located, id. at 56, 879 A. 2d 112 , a condition in a permit issued to the club owners under the Coastal Area Facility Review Act, N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 to-44, that required them to provide public access to 220 feet of beach, id. at 57-58 , 879 A. 2d 112 , and the fact that the club was a "place of public accommodation" under the Law Against Discrimin

2008In reaching this conclusion, the Court relied on various circumstances pertinent to the right of public access to a privately-owned beach under the Matthews factors, including the absence of a publicly-owned beach in the municipality where the club was located, id. at 56, 879 A. 2d 112 , a condition in a permit issued to the club owners under the Coastal Area Facility Review Act, N.J.S.A. 13:19-1 to-44, that required them to provide public access to 220 feet of beach, id. at 57-58 , 879 A. 2d 112 , and the fact that the club was a "place of public accommodation" under the Law Against Discrimin

12008–2008
Matthews v. Bay Head Improvement Ass'n green
nj · 1984
2 sentences

2005We turn now to an application of the Matthews factors to the circumstances of this case in order to determine "what privately-owned upland sand area will be available and required to satisfy the public's rights under the public trust doctrine." Ibid.

2005We turn now to an application of the Matthews factors to the circumstances of this case in order to determine "what privately-owned upland sand area will be available and required to satisfy the public's rights under the public trust doctrine." Ibid.

12005–2005
SMZ CORP. v. Taxation Div. Director green
njsuperctappdiv · 1984
2 sentences

1988Subsequent to Hoeganaes, the troublesome issue of whether a taxpayer maintained a regular place of business outside this State was presented in the following line of cases: Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director, 3 N.J.Tax. 311, 182 N.J.Super. 163 , 440 A.2d 96 (Tax Ct.1981); SMZ Corp. v. Taxation Div. Director, 5 N.J.Tax 232 (Tax Ct.1982), rev’d and rem’d on other grounds 193 N.J.Super. 305 , 473 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1984); Shelter Dev.

1988Subsequent to Hoeganaes, the troublesome issue of whether a taxpayer maintained a regular place of business outside this State was presented in the following line of cases: Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director, 3 N.J.Tax. 311, 182 N.J.Super. 163 , 440 A.2d 96 (Tax Ct.1981); SMZ Corp. v. Taxation Div. Director, 5 N.J.Tax 232 (Tax Ct.1982), rev’d and rem’d on other grounds 193 N.J.Super. 305 , 473 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1984); Shelter Dev.

11988–1988
Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director neutral
njsuperctappdiv · 1981
2 sentences

1988Subsequent to Hoeganaes, the troublesome issue of whether a taxpayer maintained a regular place of business outside this State was presented in the following line of cases: Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director, 3 N.J.Tax. 311, 182 N.J.Super. 163 , 440 A.2d 96 (Tax Ct.1981); SMZ Corp. v. Taxation Div. Director, 5 N.J.Tax 232 (Tax Ct.1982), rev’d and rem’d on other grounds 193 N.J.Super. 305 , 473 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1984); Shelter Dev.

1988Subsequent to Hoeganaes, the troublesome issue of whether a taxpayer maintained a regular place of business outside this State was presented in the following line of cases: Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director, 3 N.J.Tax. 311, 182 N.J.Super. 163 , 440 A.2d 96 (Tax Ct.1981); SMZ Corp. v. Taxation Div. Director, 5 N.J.Tax 232 (Tax Ct.1982), rev’d and rem’d on other grounds 193 N.J.Super. 305 , 473 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1984); Shelter Dev.

11988–1988
S.M.Z. Corp. v. Director, Division of Taxation green
njtaxct · 1982
1 sentence

1988Subsequent to Hoeganaes, the troublesome issue of whether a taxpayer maintained a regular place of business outside this State was presented in the following line of cases: Rocappi, Inc. v. Taxation Div. Director, 3 N.J.Tax. 311, 182 N.J.Super. 163 , 440 A.2d 96 (Tax Ct.1981); SMZ Corp. v. Taxation Div. Director, 5 N.J.Tax 232 (Tax Ct.1982), rev’d and rem’d on other grounds 193 N.J.Super. 305 , 473 A.2d 982 (App.Div.1984); Shelter Dev.

11988–1988

Where else courts name it

TX 16 (1950–2023) MD 9 (1970–2022) OH 7 (2005–2025) WA 6 (2006–2024) NJ 5 (1988–2017) LA 4 (1995–2007) MI 4 (2018–2025) GA 4 (2002–2023) UT 4 (2007–2026) TN 3 (1999–2003) PA 3 (1977–2018) AR 3 (1988–2016) OK 2 (2002–2014) NY 2 (2001–2023) NM 2 (2000–2022) DE 2 (2018–2023) CA 2 (1992–2025)

Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check