X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 4 No. 27 Decisions Released Feb. 9, 1996 STATE COURT CASES INSURANCE — VERBAL THRESHOLD 23-2-7844 Joyce Harris, et al. v. Richard L. Goode, App. Div. (2 pp.) Plaintiff’s case was correctly dismissed since her medical reports did not establish an adequate connection between the minimal disc bulging found on an MRI test and her complaints. LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION 25-2-7845 Elizabeth Bonney v. Bd. of Review, App. Div. (3 pp.) Although there is evidence to support claimant’s contention that her work effort, and the stress of inadequate staffing levels and budgetary constraints, aggravated her pre-existing cardiac condition, there also is evidence that claimant resigned because of reasons unrelated to her health, and she was properly denied benefits. LAND USE 26-2-7846 Barbara Petrick, et al. v. Planning Bd. Of the City of Jersey City, et al., App. Div. (12 pp.) Planning board’s decision to grant hospital site plan approval for a parking garage is affirmed, and there was no conflict of interest in the occasional employment by the wife of one of the commissioners as an occupational therapist at the hospital, since there was no evidence that wife’s status would be enhanced by the resolution’s passage or that her position would improperly influence the commissioner’s judgment concerning the hospital’s application, and, moreover, the commissioner voted against the resolution. [Approved for publication Feb. 9, 1996. Available online in NJ Full-Text Decisions.] PUBLIC EMPLOYEES 33-2-7847 Gregory J. Sallie v. N.J. Dept. of Transp., App. Div. (3 pp.) Decision of Department of Transportation to remove engineering technician from his position is affirmed, since the evidence shows that the technician suffers from a delusional persecution disorder which prevented him from being able to perform the functions of his job. TAXATION — CONSTITUTIONAL LAW 35-2-7848 3085 Kennedy Realty Co., etc. v. Tax Assessor of the City of Jersey City, et al., App. Div. (9 pp.) Taxpayer’s Section 1983 argument that it was denied constitutional due process — in that its right to challenge the municipality’s assessment of its property was illusory because it was unable to make the payment on account of taxes that is a prerequisite to an appeal — is dismissed as time-barred, since the constitutional arguments should have been asserted by direct appeal from the orders of the County Tax Board and the Tax Court, both of which rejected its claims. [Approved for publication Feb. 9, 1996. Available online in NJ Full-Text Decisions] CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — MEGAN’S LAW 14-2-7849 In the Matter of E.D., etc., App. Div. (5 pp.) Since the principal objective of the Registration and Community Notification Laws is to give notice to those “likely to encounter” and be threatened by the risk of re-offense by an intractable recidivist like registrant, the fact that registrant moved out of state did not deprive the New Jersey trial court of jurisdiction to adjudicate his classification, since he still worked in New Jersey, and those in the geographic area around his workplace were still “likely to encounter” him. [Approved for publication Feb. 9, 1996. Available online in NJ Full-Text Decisions.] FEDERAL COURT CASES BANKRUPTCY — FORECLOSURE — RIGHT TO CURE DEFAULT 42-6-7850 In the matter of Beverly Ross, Debtor, U.S. Bankruptcy Ct. (21 pp.) Because a New Jersey foreclosure sale is complete when the sheriff delivers the deed to the successful purchaser, a debtor may cure a default and reinstate a residential mortgage following the entry of a foreclosure judgment and a sheriff’s sale until the actual delivery of a sheriff’s deed to the successful purchaser; since debtor in this case filed her Chapter 13 petition on the same day that the sheriff’s deed was issued, a hearing is required to determine which event occurred first. [For publication. Available online in 3rd Circuit - District Court.] IMMIGRATION — EXTRADITION 51-7-7851 Mehmet Semih Sidali v. Immigration and Naturalization Serv., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (26 pp.) In a case where the U.S. seeks to extradite petitioner to Turkey after he has been in this country legally for more than 20 years without problems, even though petitioner had been acquitted twice at trial before Turkish courts of the crime for which extradition is sought, the magistrate judge erred in finding that the U.S. proved that petitioner is under a judgment of conviction in Turkey, and that there was probable cause that petitioner committed the crime for which extradition was sought, and the habeas corpus petition is granted. [For publication. Available online in 3rd Circuit � District Court.] INSURANCE 23-7-7852 Repeat-O-Type Stencil Mfg. Corp., etc., et al. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co., etc., U.S. Dist. Ct. (20 pp.) Since patent infringement claims asserted against plaintiff in the underlying suit do not fall within the definition of “advertising injuries” in the insurance policy issued by defendant, and the non-patent claims are expressly excluded, the court grants insurer’s motion to dismiss complaint seeking to compel it to provide a defense for plaintiff. PRODUCT LIABILITY 32-7-7853 Luis Carlos Lucio DeSousa Costa v. Port Auth.of N.Y. and N.J., et al.; Port Auth. of N.Y. and N.J., et al. v. Wollard Equip. Co., U.S. Dist. Ct. (10 pp.) Where plaintiff’s expert’s report only cites negligent design and maintenance of the ladder from which plaintiff — an airline employee — fell, summary judgment is granted to ladder manufacturer on plaintiff’s direct complaint alleging a claim for negligent assembly, and on that part of defendant’s third-party complaint alleging negligent manufacture, but summary judgment is not granted on that count of third-party complaint alleging negligent design. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — MEGAN’S LAW 14-7-7854 E.B. (a fictitious name) v. Deborah T. Poritz, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (17 pp.) (1) Since plaintiff was denied an opportunity to meaningfully raise his constitutional challenges to Megan’s Law in state court proceedings — which were only meant to deal with his tier classification and the extent of the proposed community notification — the Rooker-Feldman doctrine does not impede the federal court’s exercise of subject matter jurisdiction over the constitutional challenges, and (2) since plaintiff has shown a reasonable probability of eventual success in the litigation, that he will suffer irreparable harm if a preliminary injunction is not issued, that the state will not so suffer, and that the public interest will be served by an injunction, defendants are enjoined from implementing Tier Two and Tier Three notifications about the plaintiff under Megan’s Law until further court order. [For publication. Available online in 3rd Circuit - District Court.]

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

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* 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 © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.