apparent exception (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

apparent exception in New Jersey

10 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1959–2025 1 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 of New Jersey v. Sandra Abrilgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2016 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2025–2025
1 sentence

2025"In the event of a discrepancy between the court's oral pronouncement of sentence and the sentence described in the [JOC], the sentencing transcript controls and a corrective judgment is to be entered." State v. Abril, 444 N.J.

11
Silver v. Silvergreen
njsuperctappdiv · 2006 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019
1 sentence

2019See Silver v. Silver, 387 N.J.

11
State v. Hayesgreen
nj · 2011 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2011–2011
2 sentences

2011Defendant may request correction of the Judgment in an application to the trial court. [4] In Hayes, supra, 205 N.J. at 539-40, 16 A. 3d at 1038-39 , the Supreme Court held that the trial court had abused its discretionary authority in denying an adjournment and that the defendant had been prejudiced as a result.

2011Defendant may request correction of the Judgment in an application to the trial court. [4] In Hayes, supra, 205 N.J. at 539-40, 16 A. 3d at 1038-39 , the Supreme Court held that the trial court had abused its discretionary authority in denying an adjournment and that the defendant had been prejudiced as a result.

11
Morrison's Estategreen
pa · 1941 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1996–1996
2 sentences

1996This is subject to an apparent exception, for while a partnership as such is not a person, it, as a matter of fact, is treated by a legal fiction as a quasi person or an entity for such purposes as keeping of partnership accounts and marshalling assets. [ In Morrison's Estate, 343 Pa. 157 , 22 A. 2d 729, 732 (1941).] Likewise, in Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. v. Fike, 304 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist.

1996This is subject to an apparent exception, for while a partnership as such is not a person, it, as a matter of fact, is treated by a legal fiction as a quasi person or an entity for such purposes as keeping of partnership accounts and marshalling assets. [ In Morrison's Estate, 343 Pa. 157 , 22 A. 2d 729, 732 (1941).] Likewise, in Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. v. Fike, 304 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist.

11
Cooper v. Government Employees Insurancegreen
nj · 1968 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1985–1985
1 sentence

1985I am bothered, however, by the apparent exception injected into New Jersey insurance law by the statement made concerning the "prejudice" rule established in Cooper v. Government Employees Insurance Company, 51 N.J. 86, 94 (1968).

11

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (1)

CaseNegativeCited
Maryland Credit Finance Corp. v. Reevesgreen
njsuperctappdiv · 1957 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1959–1959
1 sentence

1959But see Maryland Credit Finance Corporation v. Reeves, 45 N.J.

11

Also cited on this issue (8)

CaseCitedYears
Edwards v. Arizona green
scotus · 1981
2 sentences

2012The Court held that a suspect who has invoked his or her right to counsel “is not subject to further interrogation by the authorities until counsel has been made available to him, unless the accused himself initiates further communication, exchanges, or conversations with the police.” Id. at 484-85 , 101 S.Ct. at 1885 , 68 L.Ed.2d at 386 .

2012The Court held that a suspect who has invoked his or her right to counsel “is not subject to further interrogation by the authorities until counsel has been made available to him, unless the accused himself initiates further communication, exchanges, or conversations with the police.” Id. at 484-85 , 101 S.Ct. at 1885 , 68 L.Ed.2d at 386 .

12012–2012
Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. v. Fike green
fladistctapp · 1974
2 sentences

1996This is subject to an apparent exception, for while a partnership as such is not a person, it, as a matter of fact, is treated by a legal fiction as a quasi person or an entity for such purposes as keeping of partnership accounts and marshalling assets. [ In Morrison's Estate, 343 Pa. 157 , 22 A. 2d 729, 732 (1941).] Likewise, in Ohio Casualty Insurance Co. v. Fike, 304 So. 2d 136 (Fla. Dist.

1996Ct. App. 1974), the Florida District Court of Appeal held that, although in the commercial sense a partnership is looked upon as a legal entity, Florida follows the common law view "that a partnership is not a legal entity apart from the members composing it." Fike, supra, 304 So. 2d at 137 .

11996–1996
United States v. Robert Flanagan, James Keweshan, Sidney Landis and Thomas McNamee green
ca3 · 1982
1 sentence

1991In Flanagan, the trial court refused to accept an apparent waiver of separate counsel, and was upheld at 679 F.2d 1072 .

11991–1991
Bortz v. Rammel green
njsuperctappdiv · 1977
1 sentence

1985Braitman v. Overlook Terrace Corp., 68 N.J. 368 (1975), Bortz v. Rammel, 151 N.J.Super. 312 (App.Div.1977); Mattero v. Silverman, 71 N.J.

11985–1985
Braitman v. Overlook Terrace Corp. green
nj · 1975
1 sentence

1985Braitman v. Overlook Terrace Corp., 68 N.J. 368 (1975), Bortz v. Rammel, 151 N.J.Super. 312 (App.Div.1977); Mattero v. Silverman, 71 N.J.

11985–1985
Mattero v. Silverman green
njsuperctappdiv · 1961
1 sentence

1985Braitman v. Overlook Terrace Corp., 68 N.J. 368 (1975), Bortz v. Rammel, 151 N.J.Super. 312 (App.Div.1977); Mattero v. Silverman, 71 N.J.

11985–1985
State v. Trent green
nj · 1979
1 sentence

1980Id. at 257 . *84 While this issue was not raised by either party on appeal, R. 2:10-2 permits us to "notice plain error not brought to the attention of the trial or appellate court." We believe that the interests of justice require us to take notice of the apparent error.

11980–1980
Bank of Commerce v. Markakos green
nj · 1956
1 sentence

1959If there were such a contractual provision its enforcement would be met by the apparent bar of the decision in Bank of Commerce v. Markakos, 22 N.J. 428 (1956).

11959–1959

Where else courts name it

CA 89 (1877–2026) NY 59 (1890–2026) IL 37 (1889–2024) PA 31 (1834–2025) TX 27 (1917–2026) IN 26 (1881–2012) MI 23 (1898–2021) MO 22 (1901–2019) MN 22 (1890–2016) NC 19 (1909–2022) OR 18 (1902–2021) MA 17 (1931–2025) FL 17 (1937–2019) OH 16 (1926–2025) GA 16 (1917–2023) UT 15 (1888–2024) KS 14 (1882–2014) MD 14 (1914–2007) OK 13 (1912–2009) IA 13 (1910–2020) WV 11 (1887–2017) NJ 10 (1959–2025) CT 10 (1905–2007) CO 10 (1915–2025) MS 10 (1845–2020) AL 9 (1910–2026) KY 8 (1928–2025) AR 8 (1923–2025) NM 7 (1969–2022) DC 7 (1978–2025) WI 6 (1910–2008) WA 6 (1920–2001) VA 5 (1922–2026) SD 5 (1913–2014) AK 4 (1979–2023) AZ 4 (1982–2025) LA 4 (1961–2017) ID 4 (1969–2018) VT 4 (1977–2021) TN 4 (1927–2015) HI 3 (1908–2006) ME 3 (2009–2017) NE 3 (1907–1986) ND 3 (1979–1989) SC 3 (1958–2013) NH 2 (1838–2025) MT 2 (1915–1922)

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