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 1940–2015 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 |
|---|---|---|
Crowe v. De Gioiagreen2 sentences2015As plaintiffs counsel addressed the “reasonable probability of success on the merits” prong of the preliminary injunction standard set forth in Crowe v. De Gioia, 90 N.J. 126, 132-34 , 447 A.2d 173 (1982), he referred to the showing necessary for summary judgment: |W]e have definitely shown a reasonable probability of success on merits. 2015As plaintiffs counsel addressed the “reasonable probability of success on the merits” prong of the preliminary injunction standard set forth in Crowe v. De Gioia, 90 N.J. 126, 132-34 , 447 A.2d 173 (1982), he referred to the showing necessary for summary judgment: |W]e have definitely shown a reasonable probability of success on merits. | 1 | 2 |
Country Floors, Inc. v. A Partnership Composed of Charley Gepner and Gary Ford, D/B/A Country Tilesgreen1 sentence2011See, e.g., Country Floors, Inc. v. Gepner, 930 F.2d 1056, 1063 (3d Cir.1991) (concluding that trial "court's assessment of the evidence before it on summary judgment, since it included evidence produced at the preliminary injunction hearing and the factual findings developed at that hearing, is in error"); see also Doeblers' Pa. Hybrids, Inc. v. Doebler, 442 F.3d 812 (3d Cir.2006) (applying Country Floors standard). 12 Of course, if the proofs only satisfy the preponderance of the evidence standard, the Title Nine court may still make its abuse or neglect findings for purely Title Nine purpose | 1 | 1 |
cluster 793809green1 sentence2011See, e.g., Country Floors, Inc. v. Gepner, 930 F.2d 1056, 1063 (3d Cir.1991) (concluding that trial "court's assessment of the evidence before it on summary judgment, since it included evidence produced at the preliminary injunction hearing and the factual findings developed at that hearing, is in error"); see also Doeblers' Pa. Hybrids, Inc. v. Doebler, 442 F.3d 812 (3d Cir.2006) (applying Country Floors standard). 12 Of course, if the proofs only satisfy the preponderance of the evidence standard, the Title Nine court may still make its abuse or neglect findings for purely Title Nine purpose | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Matter of Felmeister
green
2 sentences1998The Court analogized the attorney's violation of the ban on advertising with those "who violate a court order and then seek to raise the unconstitutionality of the injunction as a defense to prosecution for the violation." Id. at 445 , 471 A. 2d 775 . 1998The Court analogized the attorney's violation of the ban on advertising with those "who violate a court order and then seek to raise the unconstitutionality of the injunction as a defense to prosecution for the violation." Id. at 445 , 471 A. 2d 775 . | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Oxford House, Inc. v. Township of Cherry Hill
green
2 sentences1993This "permanency instability" standard is not referred to or defined anywhere in the zoning ordinance, and the Township has no written criteria according to which the standard may be uniformly applied. [ Id. ] When addressing the preliminary injunction standard of "likelihood of success" regarding the Federal Fair Housing Act, Judge Gerry said that he was not required to "defer" to the Chancery judge's decision in the case before us. 1993While not explicitly disagreeing with the Chancery judge's findings, Judge Gerry did state that he did not "feel compelled to treat as persuasive precedent the decision of a State court with respect to an issue of federal law." Id. at 458 n. 16. | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Thornhill v. Alabama
green
1 sentence1940Thornhill v. Alabama, 310 U. S. 88 ; 60 8. | 1 | 1940–1940 |
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.