Case law
Opinions from 1658 to today.
4,333 results
1.68s
At & T CREDIT CORP. v. Transglobal Telecom Alliance, Inc.
966 F. Supp. 299 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 22, 1997
Transglobal clearly had possession of the Lease documents before signing, and therefore was provided with the requirements enunciated by subsection (g)(iii)(D). … The NJUCC “creates no special rule where the lessor is an affiliate of *304 the supplier; whether the transaction qualifies as a finance lease will be determined by the facts of each case.” Id.
Cited 6 timesPublishedHackensack Riverkeeper, Inc. v. Delaware Ostego Corp.
450 F. Supp. 2d 467 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 11, 2006
These two categories of materials are both clearly within the definition of solid waste under the Actjfootnote omitted). … NYS & W is clearly correct that there is substantial overlap between the allegations of the complaints in the two actions.
Cited 14 timesPublishedAtlantic City Racing Assoc. v. Sonic Financial Corp.
90 F. Supp. 2d 497 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 22, 2000
establishes that Sonic had completed inspection to its satisfaction as to these subjects. … Lack of Shareholder Approval ACRA does not dispute that the issue of shareholder approval qualifies as a title matter.
Cited 10 timesPublishedGunter v. Ridgewood Energy Corp.
164 F.R.D. 391 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 29, 1996
A Adequacy The adequacy of the class representatives depends upon two factors: 1) the plaintiffs’ attorney must be qualified, experienced, and generally able to conduct the proposed litigation, and 2) the plaintiff must not … It is likely that plaintiffs will primarily rely upon mathematical formulas, presented by experts, to establish the loss suffered by each plaintiff.
Cited 16 timesPublished513 F. Supp. 1339 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 16, 1981
If, however, the portrayal functions primarily as a means of commercial exploitation, then such immunity will not be granted. … In the present case, the defendant’s expressive activity, THE BIG EL SHOW production, does not fall clearly on either *1359 side.
Cited 90 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 8, 2019
Therefore, Plaintiff meets its burden of establishing a prima facie case by showing the aforementioned IRS assessment. 15. … Wunder have repeatedly asserted a facially meritless and frivolous defense of immunity from United States tax law and jurisdiction.
Cited 0 timesUnknownLASSITER-COVINGTON v. TOWNSHIP OF HILLSIDE
District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 29, 2021
City of Philadelphia, 10 While Moving Defendants do not assert qualified immunity, the Court, regardless, finds it unwise to engage in a qualified immunity analysis at this time. See Newland v. Reehorst, 328 F. … App’x 788, 791 n.3 (3d Cir. 2009) (“[I]t is generally unwise to venture into a qualified immunity analysis at the pleading stage as it is necessary to develop the factual record in the vast majority of cases.”).
Cited 0 timesUnknown239 F. Supp. 2d 478 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 26, 2002
It is a flexible rule, though, that “often servfes] as a vehicle for raising various residual defenses” such as failure to exhaust administrative remedies, lack of standing, or sovereign immunity. Id. (citing cases). … Defendants clearly argued that “[g]iven the broad arbitration clause in the Agreement ... there is no doubt that the arbitration clause governs *484 this dispute and this Court lacks jurisdiction over this matter.”
Cited 11 timesPublished978 F. Supp. 563 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 28, 1997
Kikumura challenged the finding that the bombs were intended to kill persons was clearly erroneous. Id. … The Supreme Court has established a narrow exception to this rule.
Cited 10 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · May 11, 2020
On April 22, 2020, Petitioner consented to a COVID-19 test, which indicated that Petitioner had had the virus and was likely recovering and in the process of developing an immunity to the virus. (Id. at 57-58). … Apr. 7, 2020) (denying request for TRO by habeas petitioner as he could not establish deliberate indifference to his medical needs).
Cited 0 timesUnknownDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2022
immunity.7 (ECF No. 23-1). 1. … Even if Plaintiff stated a claim, Sergeant Costeiro alleges he is entitled to qualified immunity. First, this Court must define the contours of the constitutional right at issue.
Cited 0 timesUnknownGenty v. Township of Gloucester
736 F. Supp. 1322 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 10, 1990
After oral argument on January 5, 1990, counsel for plaintiffs was directed to file a motion setting forth more clearly the grounds upon which plaintiffs sought review of these matters. … The remaining task is to establish a process for the management of a mechanism to clean the fluids that seep from the landfill and to provide for long-term operations and maintenance. 4 .
Cited 7 timesPublishedPollak v. Portfolio Recovery Assocs., LLC
285 F. Supp. 3d 812 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 17, 2018
The court found the evidence clearly demonstrated the defendants' intent to take the legal action threatened. … Accordingly, counsel are qualified and experienced in consumer action litigation and more than *845 adequate to represent Plaintiffs and the class. D.
Cited 4 timesPublished27 F. Supp. 2d 517 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 17, 1998
The SPR & R clearly specifies that SLEOs shall “re-eeive[ ] no compensation” for town duty functions. … The applicable New Jersey statute permits, but does not require, the establishment of an SLEO unit — nor does it require that once established, an SLEO program must be continued. See N.J.S.A. § 40A:14-146.10(a).
Cited 8 timesPublishedDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 11, 2023
must review the complaint and dismiss the action if it determines that the action is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … To establish a prima facie claim under ECOA, a plaintiff must show that she (1) was a member of a protected class; (2) applied for credit from defendant; (3) was qualified for the credit; and (4) was denied credit.
Cited 0 timesUnknownMcGurl v. Teamsters Local 560 Trucking Employees of North New Jersey Welfare Fund
925 F. Supp. 280 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 29, 1996
Accordingly, they are governed exclusively by the broad statutory scheme that ERISA established and are exempt from state insurance regulations. See FMC Corp. v. … Clearly, then, Zalkin has no precedential value in a case controlled by federal common law.
Cited 5 timesPublishedIn Re Able Laboratories Securities Litigation
425 F. Supp. 2d 562 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 3, 2006
Clearly, both Deka and DERP have filed motions to be appointed as lead plaintiff within the sixty-day period, and thus satisfied the requirements of the PSLRA. 11 Not only has Upham failed to demonstrate that there would … Since it appears to this Court that the IIG, the lead plaintiff, has carefully selected qualified *574 counsel, this Court will not disturb that choice.
Cited 14 timesPublishedBARTLEY v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY
District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 31, 2021
The Eleventh Amendment bars such suits unless the State has waived its immunity.” Will, 491 U.S. at 66, 109 S. Ct. 2304. … “[T]o establish a claim against a policy maker under § 1983 a plaintiff must allege and prove that the official established or enforced policies and practices directly causing the constitutional violation.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownSAMMUT v. VALENZANO WINERY LLC
District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 17, 2019
At some point, Troopers Gonzales and Crothers approached Plaintiff and “reported that he was clearly intoxicated.” (Id. at ¶ 13.) … immunity.”
Cited 0 timesUnknownShovlin v. University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey
50 F. Supp. 2d 297 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 3, 1998
Plaintiff was clearly out-of-order to attack the inquiry as a ploy by the administration *314 “to set-up. a bogus evaluation of the Research Center’s director” and “to discredit Dr. B. … A federal court in this jurisdiction has yet to recognize a § 1983 claim based upon the deprivation of the State-created interest in reputation under New Jersey law. 21 Thus, under the doctrine of qualified immunity, Larson
Cited 5 timesPublished
Ask Donna