X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 4, No. 246 — December 27, 1996 STATE COURT CASES LAND USE 26-2-0889 Bulur v. Bd. of Adjustment of Clifton, et al., App. Div. (3 pp.) Plaintiffs — objectors to defendant’s application to renovate a pre-World War I former textile mill into retail, office and warehouse facilities — had the opportunity to speak and express their objections before the full board, and did so on several occasions during the proceedings, and the Chairman did not err in refusing to open the meeting to comment after the conclusion of the applicant’s presentation; approval of bulk and use variances and site plan approval are affirmed. NEGLIGENCE — TORT CLAIMS ACT 31-2-0890 H.G. v. County of Morris, et al., App. Div (12 pp.) Plaintiff’s case — arising from certain criminal sexual conduct engaged in by a law enforcement officer against plaintiff while she was enrolled in the Sheriff’s Labor Assistance Program, by which the officer was employed — was properly dismissed based on the statute of limitations, since she failed to prove that the accrual of her cause of action should be tolled due to her allegedly being under duress as a result of the conduct; although she proved subjective duress, she did not meet the required objective standard. TAXATION 35-2-0891 Sabino v. Director, Div. of Taxation, App. Div. (13 pp.) The Tax Court erred in its conclusion that “all costs and expenses” as used in N.J.S.A. 54:5-1b means, virtually, any and all expenses of a business, whether related or unrelated to the conduct of that business, and erred in adopting taxpayer’s position that he could deduct his proportionate share of partnership contributions from his partnership income in arriving at his net income. [Approved for publication Dec. 27, 1996.] WORKERS’ COMPENSATION — GOING AND COMING RULE 39-2-0892 Perry v. State, Dept. of Law and Safety, etc., App. Div. (8 pp.) Compensation judge erred in holding that state trooper’s actions — in shoveling out her snowbound unmarked police car from her driveway to go to work — constituted her acting within the scope of her employment, such that her back injury sustained in the shoveling was compensable, since the actions did not come within either exception to the going and coming rule. [Approved for publication Dec. 27, 1996.] CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — JUVENILES 14-2-0893 State in the Interest of D.M.P., a Juvenile, App. Div. (7 pp.) Because the trial judge failed to find that the juvenile acted, in touching young male victims, with the purpose of personal sexual arousal or gratification required by N.J.S.A. 2C:14-3, and the evidence is insufficient to allow a finding of that purpose, the court reverses the adjudication of delinquency for criminal sexual contact, although the adjudication for harassment is affirmed. CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE — THEFT 14-2-0894 State v. Harrison, App. Div. (5 pp.) Plain error was committed by the judge’s failure to tell the jury that “from the person or victim” is a necessary element of the offense of theft from the person under N.J.S.A. 2C:20-2b(2)(d), and because only $5.00 was stolen, the theft here would be a disorderly persons offense unless it was from the person of the victim, therefore the error mandates reversal of the conviction of the theft from the person charge. FEDERAL COURT CASES LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT 25-7-0895 Grace Wilkerson v. Automatic Data Processing, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (13 pp.) Since more than ninety days passed since the EEOC issued its right to sue letter to plaintiff, and she has not proven any means by which the limitation period should be equitably tolled, and, in fact, did not file this action until 83 days after the dismissal with prejudice, well beyond any extra time she would have had even if her equitable tolling argument had prevailed, her discrimination complaint under the Americans With Disabilities Act is dismissed. [Filed Dec. 9, 1996.] LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT — RACIAL AND RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION 25-7-0896 Bukatman v. The Town of Secaucus, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (9 pp.) In a case where former municipal attorney alleges discrimination at the hands of various municipal employees and other individuals, the court grants the motion of a “non-council defendant” for reconsideration of court’s refusal to dismiss plaintiff’s NJLAD claims against him, since the intervening district court decision in Tyson v. Cigna Corp., 918 F.Supp. 836 (D.N.J. 1996) sets forth the circumstances under which an individual employee could be found liable under the NJLAD, and this defendant does not fit within those circumstances. [Filed Dec. 4, 1996.][For prior opinion, see DDS No. 25-7-9017.] Copyright 1996 by American Lawyer Media, L.P. A Daily Reporter of New Jersey Court Decisions THIS WEEK IN THE … 1996 was a year of high drama and low expectations. The lives of Robert Wilentz, a great man, and Nicholas Bissell Jr., a bad one, ended like classical tragedies. The other major developments were merely good theater. See page 1 of the Dec. 30 Law Journal.

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.