From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

In re Petition of Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 25, 2008
962 A.2d 482 (N.J. 2008)

Summary

stating we must defer to an agency finding "unless it is arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial credible evidence in the record, or is in violation of express or implicit legislative policy"

Summary of this case from In re Sigwart

Opinion

No. A-41 September Term 2008.

Argued November 17, 2008.

Decided November 25, 2008.

On certification to the Superior Court, Appellate Division, whose opinion is reported at 401 N.J.Super. 247, 950 A.2d 231 (2008).

Karen A. Confoy, argued the cause for appellants Adamar of New Jersey, Inc., Tropicana Casino and Resorts, Inc., Tropicana Entertainment Holdings, LLC, Tropicana Entertainment Intermediate Holdings, LLC and Tropicana Entertainment, LLC, as holding Companies of Adamar of New Jersey, Inc. ( Sterns Weinroth, attorneys; Paul M. O'Gara, of counsel; Mr. O'Gara, Ms. Confoy, Dennis Daly and Erica S. Helms, on the briefs).

Dianna R. Williams-Fauntleroy, General Counsel, argued the cause for respondent Casino Control Commission ( Ms. Williams-Fauntleroy, attorney; Steven M. Ingis and Leonard J. DiGiacomo, Assistant General Counsel, on the briefs).

Josh S. Lichtblau, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent Division of Gaming Enforcement ( Anne Milgram, Attorney General of New Jersey, attorney; Wendy Alice Way, Deputy Attorney General, on the letter briefs).


The judgment of the Appellate Division is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in Judge Cuffs written opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 401 N.J.Super. 247, 950 A.2d 231 (2008).

For affirmance — Chief Justice RABNER and Justices LONG, LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, WALLACE, RIVERA-SOTO and HOENS — 7.

Opposed — None.


Summaries of

In re Petition of Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.

Supreme Court of New Jersey
Nov 25, 2008
962 A.2d 482 (N.J. 2008)

stating we must defer to an agency finding "unless it is arbitrary, capricious, unsupported by substantial credible evidence in the record, or is in violation of express or implicit legislative policy"

Summary of this case from In re Sigwart
Case details for

In re Petition of Adamar of New Jersey, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:IN THE MATTER OF THE PETITION OF ADAMAR OF NEW JERSEY, INC. FOR RENEWAL OF…

Court:Supreme Court of New Jersey

Date published: Nov 25, 2008

Citations

962 A.2d 482 (N.J. 2008)
962 A.2d 482

Citing Cases

Lightsway Litig. Servs., LLC v. Yung (In re Tropicana Entm't, LLC)

S.J. Mem., Ex. 18 (Adv. D.I. 194-9). Matter of Adamar of New Jersey, Inc., 401 N.J. Super. 247, 950 A.2d 231…

In re Sigwart

]'" Ibid. (quoting Close v. Kordulak Bros., 44 N.J. 589, 599 (1965)). See also In re Adamar of N.J., Inc.,…