Case law

United States v. Supermarine, Inc.

345 F. Supp. 1305 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 14, 1972

In the absence of a specific statute establishing a priority in regard to a federal lien the court must apply the principles of the common law. … Clearly, this had to occur after the transfer of the property from the United States to Supermarine.

PARKE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 1, 2025

A plaintiff asserting a FTCA claim bears the burden of establishing jurisdiction, i.e., that the United States has waived sovereign immunity with respect to his claims. E.g., Lewis v. … established” (cleaned up)).

Brock v. Claridge Hotel & Casino

711 F. Supp. 779 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 10, 1989

If an employee qualifies for exemption under this proviso, it is not necessary to test that employee’s qualifications in detail under paragraphs (a) through (f) of § 541.1 of this part. … We believed this was possibly an indicator of oversight, but clearly not indicative of a deliberate strategy to violate the statute.

Valenti v. Home Lines Cruises, Inc.

614 F. Supp. 1 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 30, 1984

contractors, ... agents used, engaged, or employed by the Carrier in such work or services, while acting in the course of or in connection with such employment ... shall each be entitled to the benefit of all exemptions and immunities … Defendant has amply established that the uncontested facts preclude any right of action.

Heli-Coil Corporation v. Webster

222 F. Supp. 831 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 24, 1963

Likewise, he would qualify as “such * * * director” who might be liable under section 16(b). … The cases decided under section 16 (b) establish the rule that in determining profit, the highest sale prices are to be matched with the lowest purchase prices within the periods involved. Smolowe v.

Marenbach v. City of Margate

942 F. Supp. 2d 488 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 29, 2013

It reiterated that Ventnor *492 Avenue is a County road, and refuted the contention of plaintiffs Pennsylvania attorney that the street is not clearly marked as such. … Plaintiffs also contend that a jury must decide whether Margate had constructive knowledge of the dangerous condition. 1 Considering the “guiding principle” that “immunity from tort liability is the general rule and liability

LINTON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 31, 2025

Feeney, 495 U.S. 299, 304 (1990) (“This Court has drawn upon principles of sovereign immunity to construe the [Eleventh] Amendment to establish that an unconsenting State is immune from suits brought in federal courts by … Apr. 10, 2023) (dismissing pro se plaintiff’s complaint against the NJOAG because “it is well established” that the NJOAG is “entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity” as a subunit of the State of New Jersey); Polanco v.

SMARTE CARTE, INC. v. INNOVATIVE VENDING SOLUTIONS LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 28, 2020

A lawsuit “does not qualify for . . . immunity if it ‘is a mere sham to cover . . . an attempt to interfere directly with the business relationships of a competitor.”’ … “Proof of a sham merely deprives the defendant of immunity; it does not relieve the plaintiff of the obligation to establish all other elements of his claim.” Id.

PRATTS v. HAMMONTON POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 19, 2021

Again, the Complaint does not clearly identify which officer arrested Plaintiff. … IFP Application Plaintiff qualifies for permission to proceed IFP.

DeLuca Ex Rel. DeLuca v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

791 F. Supp. 1042 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 11, 1992

Monson, Wright, Lamm and Swan, all qualified epidemiologists, in many cases could not replicate Dr. Done’s recalculations. … Before a witness may testify under Rule 702, he or she must be sufficiently qualified. 16 Unless expert testimony is rendered by a qualified expert, it must be excluded. Hines v.

Public Interest Research Group of New Jersey, Inc. v. Rice

774 F. Supp. 317 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 23, 1991

Subsequently, defendant, while admitting that it cannot comply with the terms of the 1989 permit, filed a motion for summary judgment on the issue of whether the Air Force is immune from civil penalties. … Additionally, plaintiffs take strong exception to defendant’s argument that the EPA is specially qualified to enforce and remedy the situation.

Veloso v. Western Bedding Supply Co., Inc.

281 F. Supp. 2d 743 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 7, 2003

Although Defendants couch their motion in broad terms, they are clearly most concerned with the possible introduction of evidence relating to the Revised Manual. … To do so, it established a “gatekeeping role for the [trial judge].” Id. at 597 , 113 S.Ct. 2786 .

In Re Synchronoss Securities Litigation

705 F. Supp. 2d 367 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 7, 2010

That is why the Court of Appeals stated that, “[ujnder Rule 12(c), judgment will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment … However, such conjecture cannot qualify as a valid claim.

HARRIELL v. CUZZUPE

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

immunity applies. … qualified immunity shield an officer from personal liability when an officer reasonably believes that his or her conduct complies with the law.”) 2 The standard for stating a Fourteenth Amendment failure

Metsopulos v. Runyon

918 F. Supp. 851 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 13, 1996

But a forgiving interpretation does not render immune from dismissal or summary judgment claims that lack procedural or factual viability. … To make out a prima facie case of retaliation, Metsopulos must establish that: 1) he was qualified for the position; 2) he engaged in a statutorily protected activity; 3) the employer took an adverse personnel action; and

United States v. Gregory Park, Section II, Inc.

373 F. Supp. 317 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 26, 1974

To seek an affirmative recovery, a specific waiver of sovereign immunity must be relied upon. … It was clearly established in United States v.

Toussaint v. Sanchez

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 15, 2022

Plaintiff has not clearly alleged the infringement of any of those rights. Plaintiff merely asserts that he “never had a hearing[.]” D.E. 1 at 6. … Plaintiff also invokes the Privileges and Immunities Clause, which provides that “[t]he Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States.” U.S. Const. art.

ABDUL-AHAD v. ESSEX COUNTY SHERIFF DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 7, 2021

immunity. … As a result, the Court will not address the issue of qualified immunity at this time.

SARBOUKH v. MURPHY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 23, 2023

Here, although Plaintiff notes that he is in a wheelchair, he does not allege facts directly regarding his injuries sufficient to permit the inference that he has a qualifying disability. … Plaintiff does not clearly identify his medical issues but does suggest that he has a medically ordered wheelchair.

MANENTE v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 13, 2025

Regardless of how Plaintiff phrases his claims, one of his clearly stated prayers for relief is to “recover moneys wrongfully withheld by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue” pursuant to 26 U.S.C. § 7422 or 7426. … Although Plaintiff has paid a portion of his approximate $17,000 tax assessments, Flora established a “full- payment rule” that has been “extended to apply to a full unpaid liability including interest fines and not just