Case law

Crumley v. Stonhard, Inc.

920 F. Supp. 589 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 4, 1996

In opposition to Defendants’ motion, Plaintiff argues that “it is not clearly established that the Plan at issue was unfunded. This is a disputed question of fact and, a such, summary judgment cannot be granted.” … Plaintiff' seeks to state a claim for breach of fiduciary duty under New Jersey law only if the Plan is not a qualified plan under ERISA.

SMITH v. BOROW

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 13, 2022

Here, while Plaintiff may disagree with Judge Borow’s alleged decision to allow or not allow certain testimony, such conduct certainly qualifies as a “judicial act,” to which judicial immunity applies. Stump v. … The remainder of Plaintiff’s Second Amended Complaint does not clearly identify a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Providence Pediatric Medical Daycare, Inc. v. Alaigh

799 F. Supp. 2d 364 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 2011

A mandatory category of medical assistance that participating states must provide in order to qualify for Medicaid are early and periodic screening, diagnostic and treatment (“EPSDT”) services for children. … Procedural due process does not protect every benefit; rather, to have a property interest in a benefit, a person must clearly have more than an abstract need or desire and more than a unilateral expectation of receiving

ERICKSON v. TD BANK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 13, 2021

.” = Complaint (ii) fails to state a claim on which relief may be granted; or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune from … Mayview State Hosp., 293 F.3d 103, 114 n. 19 (3d Cir. 2002) (non-prisoner indigent plaintiffs are “clearly within the scope of § 1915(e)(2)”). See also Lopez v.

Fleming v. Associated Credit Servs., Inc.

342 F. Supp. 3d 563 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 21, 2018

So which is it: does a device qualify as an ATDS only if it can generate random or sequential numbers to be dialed, or can it so qualify even if it lacks that capacity? … Fleming clearly expressed her inability to pay and personal hardships: "I am unemployed right now. I just got myself out of a domestic violence relationship. I fled and I have nothing.

Rosa v. Resolution Trust Corp.

752 F. Supp. 1231 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 5, 1990

In that case, however, the court did not hold that the FDIC is immune from ERISA regulations once it acts as an ERISA fiduciary. … To find otherwise would make the RTC completely immune from any judicial review and arbiter of its own actions.

Barone v. Leukemia Society of America

42 F. Supp. 2d 452 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 25, 1998

The New Jersey Supreme Court has established employment-at-will as the prevailing doctrine in this state. See Bernard v. IMI Systems, Inc., 131 N.J. 91, 105 , 618 A.2d 338 (1993). … On August 9, 1996, plaintiff sent a note to the Society that clearly indicated her desire to return to work. The note stated, inter alia: “My husband passed away this morning. This changes my plans drastically.

HOWARD v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 6, 2025

Waco, 502 U.S. 9, 11 (1991) (“Like other forms of official immunity, judicial immunity is an immunity from suit, not just from ultimate assessment of damages.”); and 4 Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) states, in … First, the SAC fails to establish that the Officer Defendants’ conduct violated a constitutional right, such that qualified immunity applies. See James v. City of Wilkes-Barre, 700 F.3d 675, 679 (3d Cir. 2012).

McKenna v. Pacific Rail Service

817 F. Supp. 498 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 29, 1993

Lindh and Petruzzelli — were not qualified. The evidence at trial established that all the plaintiffs, through their shop steward, informed McCormick of their interest in employment with Pacific Rail. … Plaintiffs are clearly the prevailing parties in this case. Once entitlement to an attorney’s fee award is established, the issue becomes how a “reasonable fee” is to be set.

MOSLEY v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 31, 2022

State Motion Defendant State of New Jersey and the Prosecutor Defendants argue that prosecutorial immunity, absolute immunity, Eleventh Amendment immunity, and/or qualified … A prosecutor bears the “heavy burden” of establishing entitlement to absolute immunity. Light v. Haws, 472 F.3d 74, 80–81 (3d Cir. 2007).

MACDONALD v. SABANDO

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 12, 2025

to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” … Div. 2008) (noting the Board’s dual purpose of granting licensure to qualified physicians and protecting New Jersey citizens).

Gilberg v. Stepan Co.

24 F. Supp. 2d 325 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 20, 1998

Stepan’s FTCA argument, however, was clearly placed under the separate caption of “Federal Question Jurisdiction.” Notice of Removal ¶¶ 14-21. … If he finds that the enemy control has penetrated the management, he restaffs the enterprise with qualified personnel.

Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders International Union Local 54 v. Danzinger

536 F. Supp. 317 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 22, 1982

Labor organizations are not immune to the possibilities of corruption. … We can be asked to condemn a state statute as in conflict with national legislation only if the conflict is clearly shown, Allen-Bradley Local v.

Anderson v. DSM N.V.

589 F. Supp. 2d 528 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 15, 2008

Plaintiff fails to prove that she is a “qualified individual.” … In her submissions, Anderson attempts to establish her status as a qualified individual by referring this Court to positive reviews she received during her tenure with DPI. {See PI. Opp. Br., p. 25-26.)

JEFFERSON v. UNITED STATES FEDERAL GOVERNMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 16, 2024

The Complaint asserts claims against the United States seeking to compel the federal government to adopt the “Gold Standard as established by Article 1 section 10 Contract clause.” (See generally id.) … ’ immunity to suit.’”

West Africa Trading & Shipping Co. v. London International Group

968 F. Supp. 996 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 14, 1997

As the Fifth Circuit has analyzed, the use of the qualifier “any” before the term “federal law” “suggests that the Advisory Committee intended Rule 4(k)(2) to reach not just federal question cases ... but all claims arising … It does not establish personal jurisdiction if the only claims are those arising under state law or the law of another country.”

Alintoff v. State Of New Jersey

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 15, 2025

or the state waives its own immunity.” … As to the Title II aspect of count one, plaintiff “must demonstrate that: (1) [s]he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) [s]he was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of some public

Schurr v. Resorts International Hotel, Inc.

16 F. Supp. 2d 537 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 1998

The regulations at issue in Bras , in the opinion of the Ninth Circuit panel, clearly authorized and encouraged the use of preferences. … To establish a prima facie case, a plaintiff must raise a rebuttable inference of discrimination by showing that: 1) he or she is a member of a protected class; 2) he or she has applied for and was qualified for a position

SELBY v. MUNICIPALITY OF ATLANTIC COUNTY JUDICIAL COURT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 31, 2020

In determining whether an act qualifies as a “judicial act,” courts look to “the nature of the act itself, i.e., whether it is a function normally performed by a judge, and to the … “Policy is made when a decisionmaker possess[ing] final authority to establish municipal policy with respect to the action issues an official proclamation, policy, or edict.

Kohn v. AT & T CORP.

58 F. Supp. 2d 393 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 1999

To establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, Kohn must establish (1) he is forty years of age or older and therefore belongs to a protected class, (2) he was qualified for the position from which he was discharged … To establish a prima facie case of disability discrimination under the ADA, Kohn must prove by a preponderance of the evidence that (1) he belongs to a protected class under the ADA, (2) he was otherwise qualified to perform