laid down test (New Jersey) · Go Syfert
← New Jersey issues

laid down test in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 4 courts 1940–1994 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 (2)

CaseFollowedCited
City of Chicago v. Harrison-Halsted Building Corp.green
ill · 1957 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1958–1983
2 sentences

1983Thus in City of Chicago v. Harrison-Halsted Building Corp., 11 Ill.2d 431, 143 N.E2d 40, 45 (Sup.Ct.1957), the court laid down the test that the “offer must be made in good faith, by a man of good judgment, acquainted with the value of the real estate and of sufficient ability to pay” in “cash.” [at 262-263] Although I find taxpayer’s recapture rate of 2.5%, based on a remaining economic life of 40 years, to be fair and reasonable based on the age and condition of the structure and the demand for such office use in this market, as previously noted, his interest rates are fraught with unwarrant

1981Thus in City of Chicago v. Harrison-Halsted Building Corp., 11 Ill. 2d 431 , 143 N.E.2d 40, 45 (Sup.Ct.1957), the court laid down the test that the “offer must be made in good faith, by a man of good judgment, acquainted with the value of the real estate and of sufficient ability to pay” in “cash.” [At 556, 143 A.2d 558 ].

23
Fernandi v. Strullygreen
nj · 1961 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1972–1972
1 sentence

1972In Fernandi v. Strully, 35 N.J. 434, 450 (1961), the court laid down the rule that in medical malpractice actions, where a foreign object is left in a patient's body during the course of a surgical operation, the period of limitations begins to run when the patient knows or had reason to know about the foreign object and the existence of the cause of action based upon its presence.

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 (4)

CaseCitedYears
Pierce v. Ortho Pharmaceutical Corp. green
nj · 1980
2 sentences

1994Appreciating that professional codes of ethics, and indeed legislative, administrative and judicial pronouncements do not always "express a clear mandate of public policy", the Court laid down the rule that "absent legislation, the judiciary must define the cause of action in case-by-case determinations." Id. at 72 , 417 A. 2d 505 .

1994Appreciating that professional codes of ethics, and indeed legislative, administrative and judicial pronouncements do not always "express a clear mandate of public policy", the Court laid down the rule that "absent legislation, the judiciary must define the cause of action in case-by-case determinations." Id. at 72 , 417 A. 2d 505 .

11994–1994
New Jersey Turnpike Authority v. Bowley green
nj · 1958
1 sentence

1981Thus in City of Chicago v. Harrison-Halsted Building Corp., 11 Ill. 2d 431 , 143 N.E.2d 40, 45 (Sup.Ct.1957), the court laid down the test that the “offer must be made in good faith, by a man of good judgment, acquainted with the value of the real estate and of sufficient ability to pay” in “cash.” [At 556, 143 A.2d 558 ].

11981–1981
Green v. Carroll green
njch · 1934
2 sentences

1941Rep. 167 , the court laid down the principle that where a conveyance is questioned as fraudulent, the burden of proving its legality is upon the grantee. *Page 217 The Court of Errors and Appeals in a per curiam opinion, in sustaining Vice-Chancellor Fielder, said: "`The burden of proving, when attacked as fraudulent, the consideration of a deed, where no consideration was paid at the time of the conveyance, is upon the grantee.'" The case of Green v. Carroll, 116 N.J.

1941Eq. 1 ; 172 Atl.

11941–1941
Bliss v. Bliss green
njch · 1939
1 sentence

1940The same effect is Bliss v. Bliss, 126 N.J.

11940–1940

Where else courts name it

OK 65 (1898–1980) NY 41 (1863–2006) IL 26 (1895–1982) WA 20 (1898–1970) TX 20 (1915–1982) CA 18 (1900–2000) LA 16 (1905–1985) KY 15 (1859–1980) WV 14 (1881–1994) FL 13 (1918–2004) AR 11 (1905–1963) NC 11 (1890–1929) MN 11 (1881–1964) GA 10 (1904–1967) TN 10 (1933–2006) IA 10 (1916–1992) ID 9 (1893–1958) AL 8 (1857–2004) MI 7 (1873–1935) NJ 7 (1940–1994) MT 7 (1904–1958) ND 7 (1909–1950) OR 7 (1912–1963) AZ 7 (1948–1969) NE 6 (1880–1953) MS 6 (1918–1964) PA 5 (1931–1980) IN 5 (1876–1992) KS 5 (1884–1965) SC 5 (1934–2025) OH 4 (1894–1941) VA 4 (1876–1951) SD 4 (1904–1957) WI 4 (1861–1930) MD 3 (1939–1979) ME 3 (1949–1965) CO 3 (1918–1924) AK 2 (1960–1969) VT 2 (1861–1887) MO 2 (1929–1980) CT 2 (1979–1979) DE 2 (1897–1948) DC 2 (1914–1958) HI 2 (1971–1976)

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