Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Shim v. Rutgers-The State University

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided June 14, 2007Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Rivera-Soto

Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, is a statutorily defined “public institution[ ] of higher education[,]” N.J.S.A 18A:62-1, that traces its lineage to a royal charter dated November 10, 1766. N.J.S.A. 18A:65-2. From that genesis, its special position in New Jersey’s system of public higher education has been cemented as an institution “impressed with a public trust for higher education of the people of the state of New Jersey; and which is the instrumentality of the state for the purpose of operating the state university.” Ibid. In furtherance of Rutgers’s mission, the Legislature…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. DiProspero v. PennSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2005
  2. In Re Freshwater Wetlands Protection Act RulesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2004
  3. Van Matre v. SankeyIllinois Supreme Court · 1893
  4. Kurilla Ex Rel. Kurilla v. RothSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1944
  5. Rinaldi v. RinaldiNew Jersey Court of Chancery · 1922

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API