abandonment rule (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

abandonment rule in New Jersey

11 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1957–2024 3 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 (5)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Derrick Brown, Leroy Carstarphen, and Kareem Strong (070200)green
nj · 2014 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022
1 sentence

2022Put another way, these factors determine "whether, given the totality of the circumstances, an A-1470-21 8 objectively reasonable police officer would believe the property is abandoned." State v. Brown, 216 N.J. 508, 531 (2014) (articulating the abandonment standard in context of real property).

11
In re N.J.A.C. 7:1B-1.1green
njsuperctappdiv · 2013 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2021–2021
1 sentence

2021In re N.J.A.C. 7:1B-1.1 et seq., 431 N.J.

11
State v. Windergreen
nj · 2009 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019We presume the jury followed the instructions given by the judge, see State v. Winder, 200 N.J. 231, 256 (2009), and defendant presents no evidence or argument supporting an abandonment of that presumption.

11
Commonwealth v. Steingreen
pa · 1931 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1965–1965
2 sentences

1965Compare Commonwealth v. Stein, 305 Pa. 567 , 158 A. 563 (Sup. Ct. 1932); Commonwealth v. Trygar, 121 Pa. Super. 525 , 184 A. 271 (Super.

1965Compare Commonwealth v. Stein, 305 Pa. 567 , 158 A. 563 (Sup. Ct. 1932); Commonwealth v. Trygar, 121 Pa. Super. 525 , 184 A. 271 (Super.

11
RAFFERZEDER EX REL. RAFFERZEDER v. Raleigh, Etc., Memorial Hospitalgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1954 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1957–1957
1 sentence

1957Appropriate insurance covering the negligence and individual liability of employees and servants could probably be imperatively required of such charitable institutions by statute." Rafferzeder v. Raleigh, etc., Memorial Hospital, 33 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 (10)

CaseCitedYears
La Fetra v. Beveridge green
· 1938
2 sentences

1997In Blaine v. Ritger, 211 N.J.Super. 644, 654-55 , 512 A.2d 553 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 105 N.J. 546 , 523 A.2d 183 (1986), we explained: The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.Eq. 24 [ 199 A. 70 ] (E. & A.1938): As to abandonment of the neighborhood scheme, minor violations do not necessarily indicate an abandonment, nor impair complainant’s right to enforce it.

1986The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.

21986–1997
State v. Lee green
njsuperctappdiv · 1991
1 sentence

2024In adopting that rule, the Court specifically disapproved State v. Lee, 245 N.J.

12024–2024
State v. Carvajal green
nj · 2010
1 sentence

2022Id. at 228 .

12022–2022
In re the Guardianship of DMH, CLHW, LFH, & RQH green
njsuperctappdiv · 1998
2 sentences

1999The Appellate Division also determined that DYFS had not met the four-prong best interests of the child standard, failing to show that L.R. caused harm to the children and that DYFS had engaged in diligent efforts to unite the children with their biological father. 309 N.J.Super. 179 , 706 A. 2d 1129 (1998).

1999The Appellate Division also determined that DYFS had not met the four-prong best interests of the child standard, failing to show that L.R. caused harm to the children and that DYFS had engaged in diligent efforts to unite the children with their biological father. 309 N.J.Super. 179 , 706 A. 2d 1129 (1998).

11999–1999
Kearney & Trecker Corp. v. Master Engraving Co., Inc. green
nj · 1986
1 sentence

1997In Blaine v. Ritger, 211 N.J.Super. 644, 654-55 , 512 A.2d 553 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 105 N.J. 546 , 523 A.2d 183 (1986), we explained: The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.Eq. 24 [ 199 A. 70 ] (E. & A.1938): As to abandonment of the neighborhood scheme, minor violations do not necessarily indicate an abandonment, nor impair complainant’s right to enforce it.

11997–1997
Roche v. Rostron green
nj · 1986
1 sentence

1997In Blaine v. Ritger, 211 N.J.Super. 644, 654-55 , 512 A.2d 553 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 105 N.J. 546 , 523 A.2d 183 (1986), we explained: The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.Eq. 24 [ 199 A. 70 ] (E. & A.1938): As to abandonment of the neighborhood scheme, minor violations do not necessarily indicate an abandonment, nor impair complainant’s right to enforce it.

11997–1997
Blaine v. Ritger green
njsuperctappdiv · 1986
2 sentences

1997In Blaine v. Ritger, 211 N.J.Super. 644, 654-55 , 512 A.2d 553 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 105 N.J. 546 , 523 A.2d 183 (1986), we explained: The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.Eq. 24 [ 199 A. 70 ] (E. & A.1938): As to abandonment of the neighborhood scheme, minor violations do not necessarily indicate an abandonment, nor impair complainant’s right to enforce it.

1997In Blaine v. Ritger, 211 N.J.Super. 644, 654-55 , 512 A.2d 553 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 105 N.J. 546 , 523 A.2d 183 (1986), we explained: The criteria by which to evaluate the abandonment claim were summarized in LaFetra v. Beveridge, 124 N.J.Eq. 24 [ 199 A. 70 ] (E. & A.1938): As to abandonment of the neighborhood scheme, minor violations do not necessarily indicate an abandonment, nor impair complainant’s right to enforce it.

11997–1997
United States v. Raymond Levasseur, Carol Ann Manning, Thomas William Manning, Barbara Curzi-Laaman, Richard Charles Williams, Jaan Karl Laaman green
ca2 · 1987
1 sentence

1990Rather, subsequently discovered events may support an inference that appellants had already chosen, and manifested their decision, not to return to the property." United States v. Levasseur, supra, 816 F. 2d at 44 .

11990–1990
Allen v. Georgia green
scotus · 1897
2 sentences

1976A doctrine of abandonment or waiver was employed in Allen v. Georgia, 166 U.S. 138 , 17 S.Ct. 525 , 41 L.Ed. 949 (1897).

1976A doctrine of abandonment or waiver was employed in Allen v. Georgia, 166 U.S. 138 , 17 S.Ct. 525 , 41 L.Ed. 949 (1897).

11976–1976
Commonwealth v. Trygar neutral
pasuperct · 1936
2 sentences

1965Compare Commonwealth v. Stein, 305 Pa. 567 , 158 A. 563 (Sup. Ct. 1932); Commonwealth v. Trygar, 121 Pa. Super. 525 , 184 A. 271 (Super.

1965Compare Commonwealth v. Stein, 305 Pa. 567 , 158 A. 563 (Sup. Ct. 1932); Commonwealth v. Trygar, 121 Pa. Super. 525 , 184 A. 271 (Super.

11965–1965

Where else courts name it

MO 149 (1885–2025) TX 84 (1909–2026) IL 66 (1898–2025) CA 41 (1863–2026) NY 39 (1873–2025) LA 32 (1931–2023) CT 28 (1967–2024) FL 26 (1931–2025) OH 25 (1960–2026) PA 24 (1905–2025) UT 24 (1987–2020) MI 23 (1886–2026) WA 20 (1963–2019) AZ 18 (1965–2025) IN 15 (1881–2019) CO 14 (1914–2026) TN 12 (1899–2024) NJ 11 (1957–2024) MS 11 (1924–2020) AL 11 (1912–2011) ID 10 (1873–2024) SC 10 (1926–2024) MD 8 (1976–2016) MA 7 (1938–2025) IA 7 (1940–2021) OK 7 (1947–1993) AR 7 (1898–2017) AK 7 (1983–1998) WI 6 (1938–2026) GA 6 (1976–2017) NC 6 (1948–2014) MN 6 (1914–2004) NM 6 (2012–2016) NE 6 (1906–2009) VT 5 (1881–2015) KY 5 (1932–2025) VA 5 (1902–2024) NH 4 (1859–2007) KS 4 (1976–2025) DC 4 (1978–2023) MT 3 (1910–2010) OR 3 (1978–2014) WV 3 (1957–1997) HI 3 (1940–2006) RI 3 (1987–2005) ME 2 (1992–2012) DE 2 (2019–2022) SD 2 (1915–1990) NV 2 (1983–2014)

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