Search for: "S. E. R.S." Results 81 - 100 of 178
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 Nov 2017, 1:43 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
Both persons have a common residence within the State of New Jersey, or have a common residence in another jurisdiction and at least one of the persons is a member of a New Jersey State-administered retirement system, and both persons are otherwise jointly responsible for each others common welfare as evidenced by joint financial arrangements or joint ownership of real or personal property, which shall be demonstrated by at least one of the following:a. a joint deed, mortgage agreement or lease; b.… [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 1:39 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
The municipal court shall declare the dog vicious if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the dog:(1) killed a person or caused serious bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b) to a person; or(2) has engaged in dog fighting activities as described in R.S.4:22-24 and R.S.4:22-26.b. [read post]
6 Nov 2017, 1:39 pm by Kenneth Vercammen Esq. Edison
The municipal court shall declare the dog vicious if it finds by clear and convincing evidence that the dog:(1) killed a person or caused serious bodily injury as defined in N.J.S.2C:11-1(b) to a person; or(2) has engaged in dog fighting activities as described in R.S.4:22-24 and R.S.4:22-26.b. [read post]
13 Jul 2017, 6:10 am by WOLFGANG DEMINO
., R.S., Ch. 1334 (S.B. 1640), Sec. 1.Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1251 (S.B. 1799), Sec. 1.Sec. 52.02. [read post]
29 May 2017, 6:00 am by Kit Case
R.S. 23:1031(E), explained that “although negligence claims by an employee against her employer for injuries sustained on the job are typically barred by the exclusivity provision of the workers’ compensation act, the act does not cover injuries arising out of a ‘dispute with another person or employee over matters unrelated to the injured employee’s employment. [read post]
19 May 2017, 12:23 pm by WOLFGANG DEMINO
Summary judgment proof showed that neither executor received FFA's notice letter dated January 26, 2010 because the letter was not sent to the debtor's address. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:21 am by Brittan J. Bush
R.S. 35:2.1’s language to the notarial acts of correction at issue in the case and stated: Determination of this issue is dependent upon the intention of the legislature in allowing for the correction of an authentic act already filed in the conveyance records by merely subsequently filing an affidavit of correction completed by the notary before whom the act was passed. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:21 am by Brittan J. Bush
R.S. 35:2.1’s language to the notarial acts of correction at issue in the case and stated: Determination of this issue is dependent upon the intention of the legislature in allowing for the correction of an authentic act already filed in the conveyance records by merely subsequently filing an affidavit of correction completed by the notary before whom the act was passed. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:21 am by Brittan J. Bush
R.S. 35:2.1’s language to the notarial acts of correction at issue in the case and stated: Determination of this issue is dependent upon the intention of the legislature in allowing for the correction of an authentic act already filed in the conveyance records by merely subsequently filing an affidavit of correction completed by the notary before whom the act was passed. [read post]
30 Mar 2017, 9:21 am by Brittan J. Bush
R.S. 35:2.1’s language to the notarial acts of correction at issue in the case and stated: Determination of this issue is dependent upon the intention of the legislature in allowing for the correction of an authentic act already filed in the conveyance records by merely subsequently filing an affidavit of correction completed by the notary before whom the act was passed. [read post]