X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 4, No. 212 — November 4, 1996 STATE COURT CASES CONSTRUCTION 43-2-0447 Sandy DiStefano, et al. v. William Pieta, App. Div. (13 pp.) Substantial credible evidence supports the jury’s award to plaintiffs with regard to the breach of contract/improper workmanship claim on house defendant built for plaintiffs, however the treble damage and counsel fee awards are reversed, since plaintiffs’ proof of the required ascertainable loss depended on their claim of a sale allegedly lost through defendant’s filing of an illegal mechanic’s lien, and their only proof in that regard was hearsay — a realtor’s letter which the judge erred in admitting. CONTRACTS — FORECLOSURE 11-2-0448 GE Capital Mortgage Services, Inc. v. Victor B. Corsale, et al., App. Div. (5 pp.) Since defendant was no more than a contract purchaser whose contract was properly canceled because he did not obtain the required financing to complete the purchase, he was properly removed from the premises by the mortgage company, and the fact that mortgage company had permitted defendant access to the property to make repairs did not elevate that access to lawful occupancy, nor was the order of removal improper based on any procedural claims with respect to the original foreclosure. CORRECTIONS 13-2-0449 Vernon S. Bullock v. Cy. of Monmouth, et al., App. Div. (4 pp.) Inmate did not show that he had serious medical needs as to which prison authorities were deliberately indifferent, nor did he show that he was denied meaningful access to the courts, and his suits alleging various constitutional violations were properly dismissed. FAMILY LAW — DOMESTIC VIOLENCE 20-2-0450 J.T. v. R.L.T., App. Div. (6 pp.) Domestic violence final restraining order affirmed where defendant grabbed plaintiff from behind, and pushed her against a closet, then pushed and shoved her down a hallway. 20-2-0451 State v. J.T., App. Div. (9 pp.) Defendant was correctly found in contempt of restraining order when he placed himself in view of plaintiff as she let out her dogs, although he was not on plaintiff’s property, and stared at her, and his purpose to harass can be inferred from the totality of the circumstances. [Approved for publication Nov. 4, 1996.] WORKERS’ COMPENSATION 39-2-0452 John Mahoney v. Marlboro Bd. of Education, App. Div. (4 pp.) By electing to accept an accidental disability pension, petitioner became disentitled to compensation benefits, and lacked the ability to structure a settlement that would provide compensation benefits exceeding his pension benefits; petitioner’s contention that judge should be faulted for not explaining the effect of N.J.S.A. 34:15-43 on the settlement for workers’ compensation benefits is without merit. FEDERAL COURT CASES CIVIL RIGHTS — CLAIM PRECLUSION 46-7-0453 David L. Sheffield v. Barbara Sacks, et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (6 pp.) Although the present suit — resulting from plaintiff’s arrest and related incidents — claims damages under 42 U.S.C. 1985 in addition to plaintiff’s original section 1983 claim, since both suits arise from the same causes of action, and since all of the involved defendants were either named or should have been named in the first suit, which was dismissed, defendants’ motion to dismiss the current complaint is granted under claim preclusion principles. [Filed Oct. 21, 1996.] CONSUMER PROTECTION — JURISDICTIONAL AMOUNT 09-7-0454 Sergio Toro v. Toyota Motor Sales U.S.A., Inc., U.S. Dist. Ct. (18 pp.) In a case where plaintiff sues under various theories for a defective vehicle, because plaintiff has made no showing of consequential or incidental damages, his potential recovery under the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act and the UCC are the same as the maximum damages under the Lemon Law, and since he may not combine his potential recoveries under the various laws to meet the jurisdictional requirements, and none of his recoveries would reach the jurisdictional minimum, his suit is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. [Filed Oct. 21, 1996.] FAIR HOUSING — RACIAL DISCRIMINATION 41-7-0455 Toy J. Younge, et al. v. Lee Frishberg, U.S. Dist. Ct. (6 pp.) Plaintiff’s motion to amend the complaint — for racial discrimination in the rental of real estate — is denied, since the motion to amend, which alleges a new cause of action, was filed more than six months after discovery had ended, and after a final pretrial order had been submitted. [Filed Oct. 22, 1996.] JURISDICTION — EMPLOYMENT 24-7-0456 Vincent Lombardi, et al. v. Aeroleasing S.A. Geneva, U.S. Dist. Ct. (14 pp.) In case seeking damages from an alleged breach of an employment agreement between former NJ resident and wholly owned subsidiary of defendant — a Swiss corporation with its principal place of business in Geneva — court grants defendant’s motion to dismiss based on lack of personal jurisdiction, since defendant’s contacts are insufficient to establish either specific or general personal jurisdiction over defendant, and the forum contacts of a subsidiary will not be imputed to a parent corporation for jurisdictional purposes absent circumstances, lacking here, that the subsidiary is merely the alter ego or agent of the parent, or that the independence of the separate corporate entities was disregarded. [Entered Oct. 21, 1996.] LANDLORD/TENANT — ENVIRONMENTAL CLEAN-UP 27-7-0457 Central Bergen Properties v. Crown Leisure Products, Inc., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (32 pp.) In a dispute between plaintiff landlord and defendant tenants over clean up cost responsibility, inter alia, (1) the court dismisses counts of the complaint which seek indemnification, contribution, court costs and other such relief inconsistent with the Environmental Rights Act ‘s grant of a private cause of action for injunctive and other equitable relief and the assessment of civil penalties for the enforcement of the ISRA, and (2) the court dismisses count of the complaint insofar as it requests: a declaration that defendants are strictly liable, damages, indemnification, court costs, attorney fees and other such relief that is inconsistent with the ERA’s grant of a private cause of action for injunctive or other equitable relief and the assessment of civil penalties for enforcement of the WPCA. [Filed Oct. 18, 1996.] Additional Opinion Approved for Publication: DDS No. 26-2-9856 Gunther Jock, et al. v. Shire Realty, Inc., et al. [Decided August 14, 1996, Approved for publication Oct. 23, 1996.] EDITOR’S NOTE: There will be no alert tomorrow, November 5, because the the courts are closed for Election Day. A Daily Reporter of New Jersey Court Decisions THIS WEEK IN THE … In the past year, Democratic Rep. Robert Torricelli has raised $528,000 in contributions from lawyers, while his opponent, Republican Rep. Richard Zimmer, has raised $427,000. See page 5 of the Nov. 4 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.