X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 3 No. 206 Decisions Released Oct. 31, 1995 STATE COURT CASES CORPORATIONS — SETTLEMENTS 12-2-6886 Jerry Whittemore, et al. v. Color Techniques, Inc., et al., App. Div. (12 pp.) The trial judge correctly denied plaintiff’s motion to vacate a settlement agreement relating to a corporate dissolution, since, although he acknowledged that pressure had produced the settlement, he found that the proofs failed to demonstrate pressure “sufficient to vitiate the deal the parties had entered into.” FAMILY LAW 20-2-6887 Mary Curtis v. Lynn Curtis, App. Div. (4 pp.) The motion judge scrupulously applied the Holder and Cooper criteria in finding that wife had a sincere, good-faith reason to move to California, that she would be able to improve the child’s quality of life there, and that a reasonable and realistic visitation schedule could be arranged for the father, with the wife paying “the lion’s share” of the transportation costs of such visitation, and these decisions are affirmed. GOVERNMENT — POLICE 21-2-6888 Carolyn McKinney, et al. v. East Orange Municipal Corp., et al., App. Div. (18 pp.) Where 10 police officers burst into plaintiffs’ apartment — looking for drugs and under the authority of a search warrant — and later realized that they had the wrong apartment, plaintiffs’ action for damages was erroneously dismissed on the defense’s motion for summary judgment, since there was a genuine issue of fact respecting the qualified immunity defense, and the trial judge also erred in excluding certain proffered expert testimony. [Approved for publication Oct. 31, 1995.] INSURANCE 23-2-6889 Patrick Gatto v. N.J. Auto. Full Ins. Underwriting Ass’n, et al., App. Div. (10 pp.) (1) Where carrier gave insured inadequate notice of policy renewal, the policy did not terminate due to the inadequate notice, but the court nevertheless should not have granted summary judgment to the insured as to coverage, since there were questions of fact regarding whether and when the insured may have received actual notice of the policy’s expiration, and (2) although coverage continued beyond the policy expiration date, it continued only for a reasonable amount of time, which also is a factual issue. [Approved for publication Oct. 31, 1995.] LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 25-2-6890 Valorie A. Yocum v. Bd. of Review, Dept. of Labor, et al., App. Div. (3 pp.) Where employee could not report to work because of automobile repair problems, even after employer allowed her a period of time to resolve these difficulties, her failure to return — and subsequent termination — constituted a voluntary quit, despite her contention that she did not quit of her own free will because the “circumstances could not be avoided.” NEGLIGENCE — DOG BITES 31-2-6891 John Trisuzzi, et al. v. Rita Tabatchnik, et al., App. Div. (13 pp.) Verdict of no cause entered in favor of dog owners is reversed and remanded for retrial on liability under the dog bite statute, N.J.S.A. 4:19-16, because the trial judge did not inform the jury of the circumstances under which plaintiff could be considered to be lawfully upon defendants’ property; nevertheless, the no cause verdict on the common law negligence aspect of the case is affirmed. [Approved for publication Oct. 31, 1995.] PARTNERSHIPS 02-2-6892 David Portman, et al. v. Raphael, Marks and Goldman, et al., App. Div. (9 pp.) In a suit arising from failed partnership ventures, (1) the motion judge correctly granted the lawyer-defendants’ summary judgment motion as to plaintiffs’ allegations of post-default breaches of fiduciary duty, since, even if there had been such breaches, they could not have contributed to the plaintiffs’ losses since plaintiffs’ recourse was limited to the partnership assets, and there were none; (2) there were, however, factual issues regarding the alleged pre-default breaches, which were asserted in the pleadings, and the judge erroneously misconstrued the scope of the complaint by denying plaintiffs’ motion to amend as containing an entirely new theory, and plaintiffs should be allowed to pursue this issue. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES — POLICE 33-2-6893 In the Matter of Eugene C. Buerle Jr., App. Div. (7 pp.) Decision of Public Employee Retirement System — denying police officer-turned-prosecutor’s investigator his application for retroactive PERS enrollment — is reversed and remanded for a factual hearing on the question of whether PERS should be equitably estopped from denying him enrollment, as he may not have been properly advised of his options to defer his Police and Firemen’s Retirement System retirement payments, which would have made him eligible for PERS. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE 14-2-6894 State v. Christopher Biancamano, App. Div. (13 pp.) Since school officials have a need to question students to determine the existence of weapons, drugs, or potential school violence, and such need requires latitude be given to the school officials, student’s constitutional rights were not violated by the vice principal’s failure to advise him of his Miranda rights during an interrogation, and, further, the vice principal was not acting “in a law enforcement capacity” or as an agent for the police at the time he was questioning the student. [Approved for publication Oct. 31, 1995.] 14-2-6895 State v. M.N., App. Div. (21 pp.) Defendant’s conviction of sexual assault and endangering a child’s welfare is reversed, since the trial judge incorrectly permitted an expert witness to effectively vouch for the child victim’s credibility and unduly restricted questions of the child’s mother and a DYFS official which tended to dispute the testimony of the child and her mother.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.