Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
23 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2026 6 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Broom-Smithgreen2 sentences2026State v. Broom-Smith, 406 N.J. 2021State v. Broom-Smith, 406 N.J. | 9 | 10 |
Pt v. Msgreen2 sentences2020See, e.g., P.T., 325 N.J. 2019See, e.g., P.T., 325 N.J. | 3 | 3 |
Frank v. Ivy Clubgreen2 sentences2026A-2459-24 6 N.J.A.C. 13:19-1.2(e); Frank v. Ivy Club, 120 N.J. 73, 98 (1990); N.J. 2021N.J.A.C. 13:19- 1.2(e); Frank v. Ivy Club, 120 N.J. 73, 98 (1990). | 2 | 2 |
United States v. Elio Jesus Arbolaezgreen2 sentences2018See United States v. Arbolaez, 450 F.3d 1283, 1293 (11th Cir. 2006); cf. State v. Broom-Smith, 406 N.J. 2017See United States v. Arbolaez, 450 F.3d 1283, 1293 (11th Cir. 2006)5; cf. Broom- Smith, supra, 406 N.J. | 2 | 2 |
United States v. William Day, A/K/A William McNeilgreen1 sentence2020A-0531-18T4 12 plea, counsel is required to give a defendant information sufficient 'to make a reasonably informed decision whether to accept a plea offer.'" Shotts v. Wetzel, 724 F.3d 364, 376 (3d Cir. 2013) (quoting United States v. Day, 969 F.2d 39, 43 (3d Cir. 1992)). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Cummingsgreen1 sentence2020State v. Cummings, 321 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Randall Shotts v. John Wetzelgreen1 sentence2020A-0531-18T4 12 plea, counsel is required to give a defendant information sufficient 'to make a reasonably informed decision whether to accept a plea offer.'" Shotts v. Wetzel, 724 F.3d 364, 376 (3d Cir. 2013) (quoting United States v. Day, 969 F.2d 39, 43 (3d Cir. 1992)). | 1 | 1 |
Strickland v. Washingtongreen1 sentence2018See State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89, 158 (1997). 1 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Fritzgreen1 sentence2018See State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89, 158 (1997). 1 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
State v. Marshallgreen1 sentence2018See State v. Marshall, 148 N.J. 89, 158 (1997). 1 Strickland v. Washington, 466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984); State v. Fritz, 105 N.J. 42, 58 (1987). | 1 | 1 |
Hill v. Lockhartgreen2 sentences2004See Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 , 106 S.Ct. 366, 370 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 203, 210 (1985). 2004See Hill v. Lockhart, 474 U.S. 52, 59 , 106 S.Ct. 366, 370 , 88 L.Ed. 2d 203, 210 (1985). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Hand v. Hand
green
2 sentences2025"In some cases, there is clearly a need for an evidentiary hearing to resolve custody or parenting time issues." Hand, 391 N.J. 2024"In some cases, there is clearly a need for an evidentiary hearing to resolve custody or parenting time issues." Hand v. Hand, 391 N.J. | 2 | 2024–2025 |
State Ex Rel. Rc
green
2 sentences2008Moreover, the presentation of expert testimony and other evidence relevant to this determination may consume a substantial amount of time. [ 351 N.J.Super. at 258 , 798 A. 2d 111 .] If a prosecutor were required to consider a juvenile's psychological impairments in deciding whether to waive charges to adult court, there would be a need for an evidentiary hearing anytime such impairments were alleged. 2008Moreover, the presentation of expert testimony and other evidence relevant to this determination may consume a substantial amount of time. [ 351 N.J.Super. at 258 , 798 A. 2d 111 .] If a prosecutor were required to consider a juvenile's psychological impairments in deciding whether to waive charges to adult court, there would be a need for an evidentiary hearing anytime such impairments were alleged. | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Mackowski v. Mackowski
green
1 sentence2007See, e.g., P.T., supra, 325 N.J.Super. at 215, 222 , 738 A. 2d 385 (evidentiary hearing required prior to entry of order of joint custody and unsupervised visitation with father who had been accused of sexually abusing the child); Mackowski v. Mackowski, 317 N.J.Super. 8 , 721 A. 2d 12 (App. Div.1998) (holding that father's motion to transfer custody of sixteen-year-old daughter, who repeatedly expressed preference to live with father, should not have been decided without a plenary hearing); Fusco v. Fusco, 186 N.J.Super. 321 , 452 A. 2d 681 (App.Div.1982) (holding that plenary hearing was nec | 1 | 2007–2007 |
MacKowski v. MacKowski
green
1 sentence2007See, e.g., P.T., supra, 325 N.J.Super. at 215, 222 , 738 A. 2d 385 (evidentiary hearing required prior to entry of order of joint custody and unsupervised visitation with father who had been accused of sexually abusing the child); Mackowski v. Mackowski, 317 N.J.Super. 8 , 721 A. 2d 12 (App. Div.1998) (holding that father's motion to transfer custody of sixteen-year-old daughter, who repeatedly expressed preference to live with father, should not have been decided without a plenary hearing); Fusco v. Fusco, 186 N.J.Super. 321 , 452 A. 2d 681 (App.Div.1982) (holding that plenary hearing was nec | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Fusco v. Fusco
green
2 sentences2007See, e.g., P.T., supra, 325 N.J.Super. at 215, 222 , 738 A. 2d 385 (evidentiary hearing required prior to entry of order of joint custody and unsupervised visitation with father who had been accused of sexually abusing the child); Mackowski v. Mackowski, 317 N.J.Super. 8 , 721 A. 2d 12 (App. Div.1998) (holding that father's motion to transfer custody of sixteen-year-old daughter, who repeatedly expressed preference to live with father, should not have been decided without a plenary hearing); Fusco v. Fusco, 186 N.J.Super. 321 , 452 A. 2d 681 (App.Div.1982) (holding that plenary hearing was nec 2007See, e.g., P.T., supra, 325 N.J.Super. at 215, 222 , 738 A. 2d 385 (evidentiary hearing required prior to entry of order of joint custody and unsupervised visitation with father who had been accused of sexually abusing the child); Mackowski v. Mackowski, 317 N.J.Super. 8 , 721 A. 2d 12 (App. Div.1998) (holding that father's motion to transfer custody of sixteen-year-old daughter, who repeatedly expressed preference to live with father, should not have been decided without a plenary hearing); Fusco v. Fusco, 186 N.J.Super. 321 , 452 A. 2d 681 (App.Div.1982) (holding that plenary hearing was nec | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Boller Beverages, Inc. v. Davis
green
2 sentences1981In Boller Beverages, Inc. v. Davis, 38 N.J. 138 (1962), the Court noted that “special rulings,” in which an administrator interprets a statute or regulation for the future guidance of all persons who may be affected, “may partake of both rule-making and adjudication.” Id. at 154 . 1981In Boller Beverages, Inc. v. Davis, 38 N.J. 138 (1962), the Court noted that “special rulings,” in which an administrator interprets a statute or regulation for the future guidance of all persons who may be affected, “may partake of both rule-making and adjudication.” Id. at 154 . | 1 | 1981–1981 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.