Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement in New Jersey

9 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1979–2006 0 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)

Case	Followed	Cited
International Shoe Co. v. Washingtongreen scotus · 1945 · cited in 4 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1987–2001 2 sentences 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super. 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super.	3	4
Milliken v. Meyergreen scotus · 1941 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1987–2001 2 sentences 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super. 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super.	3	3
Lassiter v. Department of Social Servs. of Durham Cty.green scotus · 1981 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2006–2006 2 sentences 2006In a comprehensive opinion, Judge Feinberg determined “that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause requires the appointment of counsel for an indigent child support obligor who faces incarceration.” Judge Feinberg rested her decision primarily on Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 26-27 , 101 S.Ct. 2153, 2159 , 68 L.Ed.2d 640, 649 (1981), which held that in a civil proceeding there is a “presumption” in favor of the right to counsel when an indigent litigant is facing a “depriv[ation] of his physical liberty.” Judge Feinberg distinguished her ruling from Scalchi v. Sc 2006In a comprehensive opinion, Judge Feinberg determined “that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause requires the appointment of counsel for an indigent child support obligor who faces incarceration.” Judge Feinberg rested her decision primarily on Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 26-27 , 101 S.Ct. 2153, 2159 , 68 L.Ed.2d 640, 649 (1981), which held that in a civil proceeding there is a “presumption” in favor of the right to counsel when an indigent litigant is facing a “depriv[ation] of his physical liberty.” Judge Feinberg distinguished her ruling from Scalchi v. Sc	1	1
United States v. Angela Nolan-Coopergreen ca3 · 1998 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 1 sentence 2003See U.S. v. Nolan-Cooper, 155 F.3d 221, 229 (3rd.	1	1
Faretta v. Californiagreen scotus · 1975 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1979–1979 2 sentences 1979Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 818 , 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2532 , 45 L.Ed. 2d 562, 572 (1975). [3] In Faretta , all the justices agreed to that proposition. 1979Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. 806, 818 , 95 S.Ct. 2525, 2532 , 45 L.Ed. 2d 562, 572 (1975). [3] In Faretta , all the justices agreed to that proposition.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (5)

Case	Cited	Years
Scalchi v. Scalchi green njsuperctappdiv · 2002 2 sentences 2006In a comprehensive opinion, Judge Feinberg determined “that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause requires the appointment of counsel for an indigent child support obligor who faces incarceration.” Judge Feinberg rested her decision primarily on Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 26-27 , 101 S.Ct. 2153, 2159 , 68 L.Ed.2d 640, 649 (1981), which held that in a civil proceeding there is a “presumption” in favor of the right to counsel when an indigent litigant is facing a “depriv[ation] of his physical liberty.” Judge Feinberg distinguished her ruling from Scalchi v. Sc 2006In a comprehensive opinion, Judge Feinberg determined “that the Fourteenth Amendment due process clause requires the appointment of counsel for an indigent child support obligor who faces incarceration.” Judge Feinberg rested her decision primarily on Lassiter v. Department of Social Services, 452 U.S. 18, 26-27 , 101 S.Ct. 2153, 2159 , 68 L.Ed.2d 640, 649 (1981), which held that in a civil proceeding there is a “presumption” in favor of the right to counsel when an indigent litigant is facing a “depriv[ation] of his physical liberty.” Judge Feinberg distinguished her ruling from Scalchi v. Sc	1	2006–2006
Jaworowski v. Kube green njsuperctappdiv · 1994 2 sentences 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super. 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super.	1	2001–2001
Johnson v. Bradbury green njsuperctappdiv · 1989 2 sentences 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super. 2001As we have noted: The ultimate question under the Fourteenth Amendment due process requirement is whether the non-resident has had "minimum contacts with [the forum state] such that the maintenance of the suit does not offend `traditional notions of fair play and substantial justice.'" International Shoe Co. v. Washington, 326 U.S. 310, 316 , 66 S.Ct. 154, 158 , 90 L.Ed. 95, 102 (1945) (quoting Milliken v. Meyer, 311 U.S. 457, 463 , 61 S.Ct. 339, 343 , 85 L.Ed. 278, 283 (1940)). [ Johnson v. Bradbury, 233 N.J.Super. 129, 132 , 558 A. 2d 61 (App.Div.1989).] In Jaworowski v. Kube, 276 N.J.Super.	1	2001–2001
Norwood v. Baker green scotus · 1898 2 sentences 1985The Court held that the assessments represented "an exercise of the power of taxation," that the Fourteenth Amendment required "compensation to be made or secured to the owner when private property is taken by a state, or under its authority, for public use." [ Norwood, supra, 172 U.S. at 277 .] Then, blending these concepts, it said: In our judgment, the exaction from the owner of private property of the cost of a public improvement in substantial excess of the special benefits accruing to him, is, to the extent of such excess, a taking under the guise of taxation, of private property for pub 1985The Court held that the assessments represented "an exercise of the power of taxation," that the Fourteenth Amendment required "compensation to be made or secured to the owner when private property is taken by a state, or under its authority, for public use." [ Norwood, supra, 172 U.S. at 277 .] Then, blending these concepts, it said: In our judgment, the exaction from the owner of private property of the cost of a public improvement in substantial excess of the special benefits accruing to him, is, to the extent of such excess, a taking under the guise of taxation, of private property for pub	1	1985–1985
San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Diego green scotus · 1981 1 sentence 1982Justice Brennan suggests a distinction between the Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments' Due Process Clauses in *58 his dissent in San Diego Gas & Electric Co. v. City of San Diego, 101 S.Ct. at 1306 : A different case may arise where a police power regulation is not enacted in furtherance of the public health, safety, morals or general welfare so that there may be no "public use." Although the government entity may not be forced to pay just compensation under the Fifth Amendment, the land owner may nevertheless have a damage cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 for a Fourteenth Amendment due pro	1	1982–1982

Where else courts name it

WA 39 (1966–2024) CA 36 (1970–2025) IL 26 (1970–2026) TX 24 (1987–2019) PA 15 (1972–2023) CT 13 (1984–2016) OH 12 (1986–2018) MD 11 (1976–2010) NJ 9 (1979–2006) CO 8 (1989–2019) IA 7 (1977–2023) SC 7 (1984–2003) MI 7 (1964–2008) IN 6 (1970–2018) NM 6 (1979–2023) NY 6 (1972–1997) MA 6 (1989–2002) AZ 5 (1966–2004) ID 5 (1978–2020) MS 5 (1979–2007) KS 5 (1976–1996) FL 4 (1960–1996) MO 4 (1977–2021) MT 4 (1979–2021) NC 4 (1981–2006) WI 4 (1967–2016) WV 3 (1981–1998) MN 3 (1984–1988) VA 3 (1977–2001) HI 3 (1978–2009) LA 3 (1993–2016) TN 3 (1996–2020) ME 2 (2019–2019) AK 2 (1970–1974) GA 2 (1993–1997) WY 2 (1985–2006) AL 2 (1982–1988) VI 2 (1989–2010)

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