Case law

MCLAUGHLIN

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

“[T]he thirty-day time period for removal does not begin to run until the grounds for removal are clearly established.” Von Dell v. Boeing Co., No. 11-786, 2011 WL 5974579, at *1 (D. Del. … Removal was therefore proper within thirty days of that date, when “the grounds for removal” became “clearly established], and Wells Fargo timely filed its Notice of Removal thirty days later.

Michota v. Anheuser-Busch, Inc.

526 F. Supp. 299 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 19, 1980

302(e) a district court has jurisdiction “to enforce a trust fund’s compliance with ... subsection (c)(5) by eliminating those offensive features in the structure or operation of the trust that would cause it to fail to qualify … If Pabst established its own plan, Falstaff would follow. Exhibit A annexed to Afft. of Henry A. Moran (Apr. 26, 1978). Pabst established its own plan effective June 1, 1973.

Woodland Private Study Group v. State of NJ

616 F. Supp. 794 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 29, 1985

It is well established that a federal civil rights action may not be brought against a state or a department or agency of a state unless the state waives its immunity under the Eleventh Amendment. … The State of New Jersey has neither expressly nor impliedly waived its immunity so as to permit this lawsuit against the DEP.

SANTOS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 3, 2026

to an adverse employment action despite being qualified; and (4) that adverse action occurred under circumstances giving rise to an inference of discrimination. … equal privileges and immunities under the laws; and (3) an act in furtherance of the conspiracy; (4) whereby a person is either injured in his person or property or deprived of any right or privilege of a citizen of the

N.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 26, 2026

Qualified Immunity Because the Court grants summary judgment for School District Defendants on each individual claim, the Court need not determine whether the School District … Defendants are qualifiedly immune from suit.

HERNANDEZ v. DEVLIN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 30, 2022

Defendant also argues that she is entitled to qualified immunity. (See id. at 20–26.) … As the Court concludes that Defendant’s first argument warrants summary judgment in her favor, the Court does not reach Defendant’s second argument as to qualified immunity.

Diaz v. Johnson Matthey, Inc.

893 F. Supp. 358 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 28, 1995

. *372 Plaintiffs must establish by a preponderance of the evidence that an expert is qualified and that the expert’s testimony is admissible. Daubert, — U.S. at - n. 10, 113 S.Ct. at 2796 n. 10 (citing Bourjaily v. … “A cause-effect relationship need not be clearly established by animal or epidemiological studies before a doctor can testify that, in his opinion, such a relationship exists.” Ferebee v.

TOUSSAINT v. SANTOS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 3, 2021

complaint and dismiss the action if it determines that the action (i) is frivolous or malicious, (ii) fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, or (iii) seeks monetary relief against a defendant who is immune … To establish a prima face case of discrimination under the ADA, “the plaintiff must show: (1) he is a disabled person within the meaning of the ADA; (2) he is otherwise qualified to perform the essential functions of the

FILLICHIO v. TOMS RIVER POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 30, 2022

For a plaintiff “[t]o establish a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress, a plaintiff is required to establish: (1) that the defendants acted intentionally or recklessly, both in doing the act and in producing … immunity and that Plaintiff has not demonstrated that the force employed by Officer Colline and Officer Inglis was excessive in violation of the Fourth Amendment.

DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 20, 2022

However, Plaintiff clearly names them as Defendants in the body of his complaint. Therefore, the Clerk shall add these Defendants to the caption of this case. 2020 through grievances. (See Dkt. No. 1-1 at 4). … F.3d 1186, 1190–91 (3d Cir. 1995) (a plaintiff “must show that a policymaker for the [municipality] authorized policies that led to the violations or permitted practices that were so permanent and well settled as to establish

O.T. Ex Rel. Turton v. Frenchtown Elementary School District Board of Education

465 F. Supp. 2d 369 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 11, 2006

Instead, the record clearly shows that the performance was open to the entire Frenchtown community. … regulation, custom, or usage, of any State or Territory ... 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

Rogers v. Exxon Research and Engineering Company

404 F. Supp. 324 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 5, 1975

(Tr. 5/17/75: 32-33) It is the Court’s view that the ADEA essentially establishes a new statutory tort. … It is clearly the former which is at issue here.

COUSAR v. MORGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 8, 2022

Plaintiff argues when Defendant Ciacci applied for the arrest warrant he did not establish probable cause. (Id., ¶ 61.) … App’x. at 171–72 (affirming grant of summary judgment to defendants in false arrest § 1983 case on basis of probable cause and qualified immunity where warrant “appears on its face to be valid.”).

RICHARDSON v. EZRICARE, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2024

NJPLA’s Immunity Provision Although product sellers are subject to liability under the NJPLA, the Act includes an immunity provision “to rescue persons it categorized as ‘product sellers … Thus, the Court rejects EzriCare’s claim of immunity at this time. IV.

Wilson v. Bernstock

195 F. Supp. 2d 619 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 29, 2002

In the Third Circuit, a plaintiff may establish the requisite strong inference of fraudulent intent in one of two ways: (1) “by alleging facts establishing a motive and an opportunity to commit fraud”; or (2) “by setting … It is by now well-established that such allegations, standing alone, are clearly be insufficient .to support a strong inference of intent to defraud.

Mylan Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals Industries, Ltd., et al.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 13, 2026

activity to lose its cloak of immunity.” … In both AbbVie and Wellbutrin, the Third Circuit has clearly and unequivocally declined to apply the “serial petitioning” standard to Hatch-Waxman conduct.

PALLIPURATH v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2023

However, the basis for each claim is not clearly alleged, and it appears that some of the claims overlap. … Notwithstanding these principles, a plaintiff may establish a supervisor or policymaker’s liability under § 1983 by showing: (1) an establishment of policies, practices, or customs that directly caused the constitutional

TAMAGNINI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 2, 2025

Section 9 of the FAA establishes the process by which parties may seek to have a court confirm and enforce an arbitration award. 9 U.S.C. § 9. … The NSA clearly lacks any language that would create a cause of action or right to have an IDR award confirmed by this Court.

United States v. Compaction Systems Corp.

88 F. Supp. 2d 339 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 1, 2000

Therefore, the Court held that liability was not established. … “Clearly, section 113 is available to consent decree signatories. ...” New Castle, 111 F.3d at 1123 .

Duell ex rel. D.D. v. Kawasaki Motors Corp.

962 F. Supp. 2d 723 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 1, 2013

In Fiscus , the Court determined that phone calls “at least twice a week-often more frequently” qualified as “extensive communications.” Fiscus, 2006 WL 1722607 , at *7. … East Coast’s website clearly evinces an effort to target the New Jersey market. There would be no reason to include the language “Come to Delaware!” if East Coast were targeting only customers already living in state.