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.
10 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1955–2025 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Borough of Rumson v. Peckhamgreen2 sentences2025In Borough of Rumson v. Peckham, 7 N.J. 2025In Borough of Rumson v. Peckham, 7 N.J. | 2 | 2 |
Ensslin v. Township of North Bergengreen1 sentence2021See Ensslin v. Twp. of N. Bergen, 275 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Loftingreen2 sentences2001State v. Loftin, supra, 146 N.J. at 374, 680 A.2d 677 (“When the contested instruction concerns a mitigating factor, we similarly examine the instruction in its entiretyf.]”). 2001State v. Loftin, supra, 146 N.J. at 374, 680 A.2d 677 (“When the contested instruction concerns a mitigating factor, we similarly examine the instruction in its entiretyf.]”). | 1 | 1 |
City of Newark v. Fischergreen1 sentence1982This court reversed: *403 The design of the act was to remedy "repeated yearly increases in the assessed value of property, not related to or justified by any changes increasing its market value, and resulting in harassment of the taxpayer, subjecting him to the trouble and expense of annual appeals to the county tax board." City of Newark v. Fisher, 8 N.J. 191, 199-200 (1951) (dealing with the corresponding statute, N.J.S.A. 54:3-26, pertaining to judgments of the county board). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Infante v. Gottesman
green
1 sentence2025Turning to the preclusive effect of the proceedings in the Maryland federal and state courts, the motion court correctly recognized plaintiff's action was not barred under the doctrine of res judicata because the parties in the present action were not the same, nor "in privity with the [Maryland] actions." Conversely, the motion court found plaintiff's present action was precluded under the doctrine of collateral estoppel because the Maryland "tribunals clearly found that the retainer agreement . . . was void as against public policy." Noting plaintiff had a full opportunity to be heard concer | 1 | 2025–2025 |
DiTrolio v. Antiles
green
1 sentence2019Thus, in DiTrolio , we scrutinized the procedural history of the prior suit and found that the "plaintiff had ample opportunity to have fully litigated the claim in the first action; he simply chose not to." 142 N.J. at 274, 662 A.2d 494 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
State v. Martini
green
2 sentences1996When the contested instruction concerns a mitigating factor, we similarly examine the instruction in its entirety, focusing on whether there is a “ ‘reasonable likelihood that the jury had applied the challenged instruction in a way that prevents the consideration of constitutionally relevant evidence.’ ” Martini I, supra, 131 N.J. at 304 , 619 A.2d 1208 (citation omitted). 1996When the contested instruction concerns a mitigating factor, we similarly examine the instruction in its entirety, focusing on whether there is a “ ‘reasonable likelihood that the jury had applied the challenged instruction in a way that prevents the consideration of constitutionally relevant evidence.’ ” Martini I, supra, 131 N.J. at 304 , 619 A.2d 1208 (citation omitted). | 1 | 1996–1996 |
In Re Strauss
green
1 sentence1983Similarly, In re Strauss, 28 N.J.Super. 526 (App.Div.1953), involved appeals from assessments of $499,000 for tax years 1948 and 1949. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Riverview Gardens, Section One, Inc. v. Borough of North Arlington
green
1 sentence1983Riverview Gardens v. North Arlington Borough, 9 N.J. 167 (1952) (1949 judgment based on application of the Freeze Act to 1947 judgment was not a determination on the merits); Hamilton Gardens, Inc. v. Hamilton Tp., 45 N.J.Super. 124 (App.Div. *488 1957) (judgment on merits for 1951 assessment following a contested hearing froze assessment for 1952 and 1953). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Hamilton Gardens, Inc. v. Hamilton Twp.
green
1 sentence1983Riverview Gardens v. North Arlington Borough, 9 N.J. 167 (1952) (1949 judgment based on application of the Freeze Act to 1947 judgment was not a determination on the merits); Hamilton Gardens, Inc. v. Hamilton Tp., 45 N.J.Super. 124 (App.Div. *488 1957) (judgment on merits for 1951 assessment following a contested hearing froze assessment for 1952 and 1953). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Dolan v. DeCapua
green
1 sentence1955Dolan v. DeCapua, supra (16 N.J., at pages 611, 612). | 1 | 1955–1955 |
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.