election bar (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

election bar in New Jersey

11 New Jersey opinions name it 4 courts 1935–2026 2 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 (3)

CaseFollowedCited
State v. Williamsgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1985 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1987–2022
2 sentences

2022Defendant contends the trial court was required to have advised him at sentencing of the State's right to appeal the sentence pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1(f)(2) and of the election and waiver provision of Rule 2:9-3(c), as we held was required in State v. Williams, 203 N.J.

1994Defendant relies upon our holding in State v. Williams, 203 N.J.Super. 513, 518 , 497 A.2d 550 (App.Div.1985) that “where sentence is imposed pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1f(2) and R. 3:21-4(g), the court should advise defendant of the election and waiver provision of R. 2:9-3(d) at the same time defendant is advised of his right to appeal as required by R. 3:21—4(f).” However, the Court in Sanders expressly rejected this part of our Williams opinion: In State v. Williams, supra, 203 N.J.Super. at 518 , [ 497 A.2d 550 ] a panel of the Appellate Division held that a defendant must be advised at s

13
New Mea Const. Corp. v. Harpergreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1985 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2026–2026
1 sentence

2026Corp. v. Harper, 203 N.J.

11
Murphy v. Morrisgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1951 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1983–1983
2 sentences

1983Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc., 64 N.J.Super. 134, 146 , 165 A.2d 543 (App.Div.1960), certif. den. 34 N.J. 66 (1961); See also Murphy v. Morris, supra 12 N.J.Super. at 547 , 80 A.2d 128 .

1983Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc., 64 N.J.Super. 134, 146 , 165 A.2d 543 (App.Div.1960), certif. den. 34 N.J. 66 (1961); See also Murphy v. Morris, supra 12 N.J.Super. at 547 , 80 A.2d 128 .

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 (7)

CaseCitedYears
Konieczny v. Micciche green
njsuperctappdiv · 1997
2 sentences

2008The language of N.J.S.A. 46:3B-9—"initiation of procedures to enforce a remedy shall constitute an election which shall bar the owner from all other remedies"—means that "when a homeowner `initiates' a binding arbitration proceeding . . . the homeowner has elected the administrative procedure to `enforce a remedy' relating to defects." Konieczny, supra, 305 N.J.Super. at 381 , 702 A. 2d 831 .

2008The language of N.J.S.A. 46:3B-9—"initiation of procedures to enforce a remedy shall constitute an election which shall bar the owner from all other remedies"—means that "when a homeowner `initiates' a binding arbitration proceeding . . . the homeowner has elected the administrative procedure to `enforce a remedy' relating to defects." Konieczny, supra, 305 N.J.Super. at 381 , 702 A. 2d 831 .

22002–2008
Rzepiennik v. US Home Corp. green
njsuperctappdiv · 1987
2 sentences

1996However, initiation of procedures to enforce a remedy shall constitute an election which shall bar the owner from all other remedies. (emphasis supplied) The trial court's determination was based upon its understanding of our holdings in Rzepiennik v. U.S. Home Corp., 221 N.J.

1990By affirming that dismissal, this court has denied them any administrative remedy and, because N.J.S.A. 46:3B-9 provides that "initiation of procedures to enforce a remedy shall constitute an election which shall bar the owner from all other remedies," our ruling may also have precluded a money judgment against the builder. [1] See Rzepiennik v. U.S. Home Corp., 221 N.J.

21990–1996
Jones v. Mitchell green
njsuperctappdiv · 1983
2 sentences

2006However, Title 19 provides the statutory source for an election challenge of a successful candidate." Id. at 391 , 476 A. 2d 1276 .

2006However, Title 19 provides the statutory source for an election challenge of a successful candidate." Id. at 391 , 476 A. 2d 1276 .

12006–2006
State v. Sanders green
nj · 1987
2 sentences

1994In view of our conclusion that the Rule is inapplicable until the State perfects its appeal, it is self-evident that this advice to a defendant is not required until the bail hearing is held. [ 107 N.J. at 617 n. 7, 527 A.2d 442 .] Since defendant received a probationary sentence, he did not have a bail hearing.

1994In view of our conclusion that the Rule is inapplicable until the State perfects its appeal, it is self-evident that this advice to a defendant is not required until the bail hearing is held. [ 107 N.J. at 617 n. 7, 527 A.2d 442 .] Since defendant received a probationary sentence, he did not have a bail hearing.

11994–1994
Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc. green
nj · 1961
1 sentence

1983Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc., 64 N.J.Super. 134, 146 , 165 A.2d 543 (App.Div.1960), certif. den. 34 N.J. 66 (1961); See also Murphy v. Morris, supra 12 N.J.Super. at 547 , 80 A.2d 128 .

11983–1983
Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc. green
njsuperctappdiv · 1960
2 sentences

1983Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc., 64 N.J.Super. 134, 146 , 165 A.2d 543 (App.Div.1960), certif. den. 34 N.J. 66 (1961); See also Murphy v. Morris, supra 12 N.J.Super. at 547 , 80 A.2d 128 .

1983Deerhurst Estates v. Meadow Homes, Inc., 64 N.J.Super. 134, 146 , 165 A.2d 543 (App.Div.1960), certif. den. 34 N.J. 66 (1961); See also Murphy v. Morris, supra 12 N.J.Super. at 547 , 80 A.2d 128 .

11983–1983
Bird v. Hawkins neutral
· 1899
1 sentence

1935The donee is not required to accept; no duty is cast upon him; he is left to act voluntarily either in rejecting the gift with its personal burden or accepting the gift and assuming the personal burden." Bird v. Hawkins, 58 N.J.

11935–1935

Where else courts name it

TN 164 (1906–2026) TX 134 (1875–2025) CA 49 (1898–2024) IL 31 (1895–2023) AL 29 (1888–2025) NC 26 (1898–2025) WA 23 (1896–2026) MD 20 (1904–2025) NY 17 (1889–2019) AZ 16 (1926–2023) HI 15 (1979–2023) GA 14 (1908–2025) MI 14 (1918–2019) OR 14 (1947–2017) FL 13 (1960–2018) IN 12 (1874–2025) NJ 11 (1935–2026) LA 11 (1925–2020) AR 10 (1875–2000) PA 10 (1875–2024) MO 10 (1925–2019) OK 9 (1920–2023) CO 9 (1983–2025) MA 8 (1913–2005) MS 8 (1962–2021) MN 8 (1912–2012) SC 7 (1941–2024) KS 7 (1911–2014) IA 6 (1915–2020) CT 6 (1899–2019) WI 5 (1910–1963) OH 5 (2002–2022) NE 5 (1900–1992) VT 4 (1937–2018) UT 3 (1912–2021) AK 3 (1998–2008) ME 2 (1917–2012) MT 2 (1928–2024) WY 2 (1954–2013) DE 2 (1941–2020) KY 2 (1891–1952)

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