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 1 courts 1993–2026 3 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 |
|---|---|---|
Spedick v. Murphygreen2 sentences2021"A party who consents to, acquiesces in, or encourages an error cannot use that error as the basis for an objection on appeal." Spedick v. Murphy, 266 N.J. Super. 573, 593 (App. Div. 1993). 2021"A party who consents to, acquiesces in, or encourages an error cannot use that error as the basis for an objection on appeal." Spedick v. Murphy, 266 N.J. Super. 573, 593 (App. Div. 1993) (holding the plaintiff was barred from challenging the admission of the testimony on appeal where it appeared from the colloquy between the trial judge and the attorneys, that the plaintiff "essentially agreed" to permit certain testimony); see also N.J. Div. of Youth and Fam. | 3 | 4 |
State v. Harpergreen2 sentences2019"A party who consents to, acquiesces in, or encourages an error cannot use that error as the basis for an objection on appeal." Spedick v. Murphy, 266 N.J. Super. 573, 593 (App. Div. 1993) (citing State v. Harper, 128 N.J. Super. 270, 276-77 (App. Div. 1974)). 1993State v. Harper, 128 N.J. | 1 | 2 |
Goldfarb v. Soliminegreen2 sentences2026A-2790-21 55 The decision to grant or deny a motion for disqualification is "entrusted to the sound discretion of the judge and [is] subject to review for abuse of discretion." Goldfarb v. Solimine, 460 N.J. Super. 22, 30 (App. Div. 2019) (quoting State v. McCabe, 201 N.J. 34, 45 (2010)), aff'd as modified, 245 N.J. 326 (2021). 2026A-2790-21 55 The decision to grant or deny a motion for disqualification is "entrusted to the sound discretion of the judge and [is] subject to review for abuse of discretion." Goldfarb v. Solimine, 460 N.J. Super. 22, 30 (App. Div. 2019) (quoting State v. McCabe, 201 N.J. 34, 45 (2010)), aff'd as modified, 245 N.J. 326 (2021). | 1 | 1 |
State v. McCabegreen1 sentence2026A-2790-21 55 The decision to grant or deny a motion for disqualification is "entrusted to the sound discretion of the judge and [is] subject to review for abuse of discretion." Goldfarb v. Solimine, 460 N.J. Super. 22, 30 (App. Div. 2019) (quoting State v. McCabe, 201 N.J. 34, 45 (2010)), aff'd as modified, 245 N.J. 326 (2021). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
State v. Dunns
green
1 sentence2017Super. 573, 593 , (App. Div.), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 567 (1993). | 1 | 2017–2017 |