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.
6 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1969–1998 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.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Pelaez v. Rugby Laboratories, Inc.green1 sentence1996See Pelaez v. Rugby Labs., Inc., 264 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Fuller v. Rutgers, State Universitygreen1 sentence1983Fuller v. Rutgers, the State University, 154 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Zielenski v. Bd. of Rev., Div. of Emp. SEC.green1 sentence1969The burden of showing good cause under N.J.S.A. 43:21-5 is on the claimant and the test is whether there was "cause sufficient to justify an employee's voluntarily leaving the ranks of the employed and joining the ranks of the employed." Zielenski v. Board of Review, 85 N.J. | 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 |
|---|---|---|
United States v. American Telephone & Telegraph Co.
green
1 sentence1998Co., 86 F.R.D. 603 (D.D.C. 1980), the court summarized the law as to the attorney-client privilege, in the parent-subsidiary context, as follows: The cases clearly hold that a corporate “client” includes not only the corporation by whom the attorney is employed or retained, but also parent, subsidiary and affiliate corporations____If the claimant of the privilege can show a substantial identity of legal interest in the specific matter, it ... makes no difference whether the two corporations were so affiliated as to be a single “client.” But if there is no such community of interest in seeking | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Donohoe Construction Co. v. Mount Vernon Associates
green
2 sentences1990We contrast the case before us with a recent Virginia case, Donohoe Const. v. Mount Vernon Associates, 235 Va. 531 , 369 S.E. 2d 857 (1988), where the court held that the filing of a memorandum of mechanic's lien is a "judicial proceeding" entitling the claimant to the defense of absolute privilege in a suit for slander of title. 1990We contrast the case before us with a recent Virginia case, Donohoe Const. v. Mount Vernon Associates, 235 Va. 531 , 369 S.E. 2d 857 (1988), where the court held that the filing of a memorandum of mechanic's lien is a "judicial proceeding" entitling the claimant to the defense of absolute privilege in a suit for slander of title. | 1 | 1990–1990 |
In Re Hoffstedt
green
2 sentences1983Hoffstedt, supra, a case involving the probate of a will, is also distinguishable in that that case involved: not a motion to permit the act to be done after the specified time, but a motion to alter the record so as to show that it was done within time. [ 25 N.J.Super. at 266 ] Under R. 1:6-3, the return date of a motion must be at least fourteen days after the notice of motion is served and filed. 1983Hoffstedt, supra, a case involving the probate of a will, is also distinguishable in that that case involved: not a motion to permit the act to be done after the specified time, but a motion to alter the record so as to show that it was done within time. [ 25 N.J.Super. at 266 ] Under R. 1:6-3, the return date of a motion must be at least fourteen days after the notice of motion is served and filed. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Pinckney v. City of Jersey City
green
1 sentence1983Similarly, the facts of Anaya v. Tp. of Vernon, 139 N.J.Super. 409 (App.Div.1976), certif. den. 71 N.J. 494 (1976); Pinckney v. City of Jersey City, 140 N.J.Super. 96 (Law Div.1976); and Bell v. County of Camden, et al., 147 N.J.Super. 139 (App.Div.1977), are distinguishable from the facts herein. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Priore v. State
green
1 sentence1983Claimant’s motion seeking leave from the court to file a late notice was not filed until more than one year after the accrual of her claim. 190 N.J.Super. at 129 . | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Bell v. County of Camden
green
1 sentence1983Similarly, the facts of Anaya v. Tp. of Vernon, 139 N.J.Super. 409 (App.Div.1976), certif. den. 71 N.J. 494 (1976); Pinckney v. City of Jersey City, 140 N.J.Super. 96 (Law Div.1976); and Bell v. County of Camden, et al., 147 N.J.Super. 139 (App.Div.1977), are distinguishable from the facts herein. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Anaya v. Tp. of Vernon
green
1 sentence1983Similarly, the facts of Anaya v. Tp. of Vernon, 139 N.J.Super. 409 (App.Div.1976), certif. den. 71 N.J. 494 (1976); Pinckney v. City of Jersey City, 140 N.J.Super. 96 (Law Div.1976); and Bell v. County of Camden, et al., 147 N.J.Super. 139 (App.Div.1977), are distinguishable from the facts herein. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
In Re Garber
green
1 sentence1983Similarly, the facts of Anaya v. Tp. of Vernon, 139 N.J.Super. 409 (App.Div.1976), certif. den. 71 N.J. 494 (1976); Pinckney v. City of Jersey City, 140 N.J.Super. 96 (Law Div.1976); and Bell v. County of Camden, et al., 147 N.J.Super. 139 (App.Div.1977), are distinguishable from the facts herein. | 1 | 1983–1983 |
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.