Case law

J.A. v. MONROE TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION

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

Whether the ALJs Are Entitled to Judicial Immunity. The State Defendants argue that the ALJs sued in this matter are protected by judicial immunity and the Court agrees. … The parties do not appear to dispute that J.A. is a qualified individual with a disability.

Poveromo-Spring v. Exxon Corp.

968 F. Supp. 219 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 26, 1997

The former is recommended for dismissal pursuant to the Magistrate Judge’s finding that Spring is unable to allege facts which establish a link between his termination and his mother’s disability. … Infliction of Emotional Distress Claim Poveromo-Spring Poveromo-Spring alleges that Exxon Corporation intended to cause her severe emotional distress when it terminated her son’s employment and wrongfully disclosed her Acquired Immune

MULVEY v. CITY OF ATLANTIC CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 28, 2025

The City has moved for summary judgment arguing that New Jersey’s Tort Claims Act immunizes it from liability. [Docket No. 38.]1 The Court agrees. … Thus, the Court finds, the raised screw at issue here “is the kind of minor defect that does not qualify as a dangerous condition under the [TCA].” Charney, 732 F. Supp. 2d at 456.

Kadetsky v. Egg Harbor Township Board of Education

164 F. Supp. 2d 425 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 10, 2001

Rather, the undisputed factual record reveals that Kelpsh followed established procedures to investigate Kadetsky’s complaints and rectify his personnel record in response to that investigation. … When viewed against this backdrop, Ka-detsky’s speech fails to qualify as speech touching upon a matter of public interest.

Bowers v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

564 F. Supp. 2d 322 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 27, 2008

At the time of the 1995-1996 school year, the Clearinghouse reviewed students’ applications and placed applicants into one of three categories: qualifier, partial qualifier, or nonqualifier. … Pottstown Memorial Medical Center, 154 F.3d 113, 123 (3d Cir.1998) (to establish a violation *356 under the Rehabilitation Act, a plaintiff must prove, inter alia, “that he is ‘otherwise qualified’ for the position sought

Syncsort Inc. v. Sequential Software, Inc.

50 F. Supp. 2d 318 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 28, 1999

It appears the prosecution of the instant lawsuit by Syncsort is, however, immunized from antitrust liability. … In such “establishment claim” cases, a plaintiff need only demonstrate the tests relied upon by the defendant do not establish the proposition for which they are cited. Id.

BASS v. HOWARD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 14, 2019

“In order to establish a basis for subject matter jurisdiction in federal court, a plaintiff's claims must establish either federal question jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1331, or diversity jurisdiction under 28 … To allege a Title VII prima facie claim, a plaintiff must show that (1) he belongs to a protected class; (2) he was qualified for the position; (3) he was subject to an adverse employment action despite being qualified

Truglio v. Planet Fitness, Inc.

360 F. Supp. 3d 274 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 21, 2018

established legal right of a consumer or responsibility of a seller, lessor, creditor, lender or bailee' as established by State or Federal law; and finally, that the plaintiff is an 'aggrieved consumer.' " Spade-Wenger … As a result, Plaintiff cannot establish a violation of a 'clearly established legal right' under the CFA and therefore cannot, by proxy, establish a violation of the TCCWNA."), appeal dismissed , No. 15-2626 (3rd Cir.

DESSOURCES v. MANNING

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 31, 2021

Additionally, qualified immunity attaches to protect an official’s conduct when that conduct does not violate “clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would … First, the record does not clearly demonstrate a First Amendment violation.24 Second, even if Plaintiff had clearly established a First Amendment violation, qualified immunity would attach to Officer Banks’ conduct.

Gipson v. Supermarkets General Corp.

564 F. Supp. 50 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 7, 1983

However, assuming for the purpose of this motion that this threat was made, this fact alone does not establish any police involvement with the case which would permit the court to make a finding that the Pathmark personnel … any State or Territory or the District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities

DOE v. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 16, 2020

“[A]n entity qualifies for charitable immunity when it . . . was promoting [religious, charitable, or educational] objectives and [for non-profit] purposes at the time of the injury to plaintiff who was then a beneficiary … Princeton or its employees as qualified entities under the NJCIA” is misplaced.

Ford Motor Co. v. Edgewood Properties, Inc.

257 F.R.D. 418 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 19, 2009

Work product enjoys qualified immunity from discovery. … The fact that counsel prepared the affidavits, the court held, did not make them immune from disclosure.

ROJAS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 16, 2026

May 19, 2023) (in such scenarios, “district court must require ‘less of a factual showing than would be required to succeed at trial’ to establish jurisdiction” (quoting CNA, 535 F.3d at 145)). … There are exceptions to the FTCA’s immunity waiver. One of these is the independent- contractor exception, which derives from 28 U.S.C. § 2671.

LEWIS v. DIAZ-PETTI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 21, 2023

immunity. … A reading of Plaintiff’s Complaint in toto clearly demonstrates these two objectives are exactly what he seeks to achieve.

CRISDON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 6, 2026

and dismiss any claim that is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or otherwise seeks relief from an immune defendant. … Moreover, even where § 1983 may qualify as an “expressly authorized” exception under Mitchum y. Foster, 407 U.S, 225, 242-43 (1972), federal couits remain subject to the equitable restraint imposed by Younger.

In Re Telfair

745 F. Supp. 2d 536 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 15, 2010

Specifically, he dismissed Telfair’s claims against Bergrin (for failure to meet the color-of-law requirement), see id. at 21, as well as Telfair’s claims against prosecutors (on the grounds of prosecutorial immunity), see … qualify as emergent. 48 .

Township of Marlboro v. Board of Education of Freehold Regional High School

992 F. Supp. 756 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 4, 1998

This infirmity arises from the failure to apportion school board votes in contravention of the well established principle of “one person, one vote.” The seminal case of Reynolds v. … Sims, 377 U.S. 533 , 84 S.Ct. 1362 , 12 L.Ed.2d 506 (1964) held that a qualified voter has a constitutional right to vote in a state legislative election without having his vote wrongfully denied, debased, or diluted; “[f

MCGILLVARY v. SCUTARI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 11, 2025

These acts are clearly judicial in nature and were not taken in the complete absence of all jurisdiction. See, e.g., Azubuko, 443 F.3d at 303 (dismissing appeal under 28 U.S.C. … However, the factual averments set forth in the first Amended Complaint fail to establish valid Bivens claims under existing law.

Hansen Savings Bank v. Office of Thrift Supervision

758 F. Supp. 240 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 1991

. § 1464 (t)(3)(A), (West Supp.1990), states in part: (A) Certain Qualifying Supervisory Goodwill Included in Calculating Core Capital.— ... … [A]n eligible savings association may include qualifying supervisory goodwill in calculating core capital.

New Jersey Physicians United Reciprocal Exchange v. Boynton & Boynton, Inc.

141 F. Supp. 3d 298 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2015

Best Capital Adequacy Ratio (“BCAR”) score, of 183.6, . which “qualifies [NJ PURE] for an A+ + (Superior) rating.” . Counterclaim ¶¶ 32-35. … Judgment on the pleadings pursuant to Rule 12(c) will be granted where the moving party clearly establishes there are no material issues of fact to be resolved, and that he or she is entitled to judgment as a matter of law