Abbott v. Burke

832 A.2d 906, 177 N.J. 596, 2003 N.J. LEXIS 853
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided July 23, 2003·Published·Cited by 10 cases

Opinion

LONG, J.,

dissenting from the Order, would grant no further extension of the June 11, 2002, stay of implementation of Abbott IV or Abbott V. She joined in that Order solely because it was based on an application by both parties who expressed a commitment to cooperative resolution of the long-simmering Abbott dispute. Through the mediated Order of June 24, 2003, the parties have exhausted their common ground. There is therefore no further reason for delay. Although the State is facing financial difficulties, as are other states and the federal government, our constitutional mandates regarding the education of all of our children cannot be diluted in reliance thereon.

[600]*600Concurring—Chief Justice PORITZ and Justices LaVECCHIA, ALBIN, and WALLACE-4.

Dissenting—Justice LONG—1.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Abbott v. Burke, 832 A.2d 906, 177 N.J. 596, 2003 N.J. LEXIS 853 (N.J. 2003).

832 A.2d 906 (Abbott v. Burke) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Board of Education v. New Jersey Department of Education
872 A.2d 1052 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2005)
Asbury Park Board of Education v. New Jersey Department of Education
849 A.2d 158 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2004)
Asbury Park Board of Education v. New Jersey Department of Education
849 A.2d 1086 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)
Asbury Park Bd. of Educ. v. NJ DOE
849 A.2d 1074 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2004)
Abbott Ex Rel. Abbott v. Burke
832 A.2d 906 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2003)