Case law

MENDEZ VALLEJO v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 27, 2021

The Westfall Act provides absolute immunity to federal employees in the wake of Westfall v. … This certification of the Attorney General shall conclusively establish scope of office or employment for purposes of removal. 28 U.S.C. § 2679(d)(2).

Sciarotta v. Bowen

735 F. Supp. 148 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 9, 1989

The instructions set forth a three-step procedure for prorating a state lump sum award “at an established weekly rate.” The three steps are to be applied in priority order as follows (quoting from POMS, supra): 1. … The disability insurance program is a contributory insurance program clearly designed to prevent need, even though it is not need-based.

Vulcan Pioneers, Inc. v. New Jersey Department of Civil Service

625 F. Supp. 513 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 19, 1985

Finally, there is the public, which has a right to expect that responsible positions of leadership in the fire departments will be filled expeditiously by persons clearly qualified to supervise and perform the highly important … Nor does the court find the 1984 analysis of the State’s test performed by its expert to establish the validity of such test.

Fitch v. Shults

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 14, 2021

Section 2255 provides, in relevant part, as follows: A prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress claiming the right to be released upon the ground that … Because Petitioner’s Davis claim is clearly without merit for the reasons expressed below, no evidentiary hearing is necessary in this matter. B.

KIRKLAND v. STATE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 5, 2023

P. 12(b)(6) and/or dismiss any defendant who is immune from suit. See 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii)- (iii). … IFP Application Plaintiff qualifies for permission to proceed IFP.

United States v. Rodriguez

430 F. Supp. 2d 388 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 12, 2006

That instruction clearly conveyed the jury’s obligation to carefully consider each count and reach a unanimous verdict. … The Government may only seize a substitute asset “that qualifies for forfeiture under an applicable statute.” Fed.R.Crim.P. 32.2(e)(1)(B).

DEBENEDETTO v. LACEY TOWNSHIP BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 29, 2022

DeBenedetto retorts that circuit law clearly establishes that schools cannot regulate off-campus speech and that the Amended Complaint sufficiently alleges a Monell claim. … In Tinker, the U.S, Supreme Court held that a high school could not discipline students wearing black * Neither the Lacey Defendants nor Ocean invokes a qualified-immunity defense.

QASSIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 10, 2025

Not only does the NJTCA “consistently use[] the singular” when describing the notice claim, the Court reasoned, but “the Legislature [also] clearly intended that there be one identifiable date—not a series of dates—on … Plaintiffs have not established that there is a genuine issue of material fact as to their substantive due process claim.

Torres v. Kuzniasz

936 F. Supp. 1201 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 20, 1996

The federal “law enforcement” privilege, sometimes referred to as an “executive” privilege or “official information” privilege, is a qualified privilege designed to prevent the disclosure of information that would be contrary … Rather, they must clearly demonstrate to the court how the balance of the Frankenhauser factors weighs in favor of protection for each document.

THE ESTATE OF EDWARD C. GANDY, JR. v. CITY OF MILLVILLE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 28, 2023

New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act The New Jersey Charitable Immunity Act (“NJCIA”) limits the negligence liability of nonprofit hospitals to $250,000. N.J. STAT ANN. § 2A:53A-8. … However, Plaintiffs do not clearly identify the basis for these claims and instead leave this Court to divine their meaning.

ABREU v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 8, 2023

Petitioner’s underlying crime thus clearly qualifies as a crime of violence under the sentencing guidelines. Id. Neither Borden nor McCormack alters this conclusion. … Petitioner was not charged with that offense, and was clearly not sentenced above the statutory maximum in this case.

Nebraskaland, Inc. v. River Street Idealease, LLC

188 F. Supp. 3d 390 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 18, 2016

The CPLA was enacted by the New Jersey Legislature in 1995 to “establish[ ] requirements and standards for motor vehicle leases.” General Motors Acceptance Corp. v. … Defendant argues that the parties are free to establish the formula for which they will determine the vehicle’s fair market value. (Defs.’ Reply Br. at 6).

Lusitania Savings Bank, FSB v. Progressive Casualty Insurance

328 F. Supp. 2d 514 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 30, 2004

As Leuzzi’s own signature is reflected on the back of the Check, it is clearly a part of the endorsement and falls under the exception to the forgery definition. … Therefore, the Court concludes that this does not qualify as “forgery” under the Bond.

Morro v. DGMB Casino LLC

112 F. Supp. 3d 260 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 2015

To establish a claim of discrimination (also known as retaliation) under the FMLA, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination by demonstrating that: (1) she availed herself of a protected right … However, this entitlement to restoration is a qualified one.

Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. v. Boehringer Ingelheim Corp.

86 F. Supp. 2d 433 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 2, 2000

Summary Judgment Standard Patent cases are not immune to summary judgment motions. … Bristol clearly stated that by the earlyl990s, premedication of taxol recipients in order to reduce HSRs was “conventional.” This statement was not qualified by expected infusion duration.

C.W. v. NEW PROVIDENCE BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 27, 2023

Plaintiff clearly satisfies the first prong of the Wheeler test. … Plaintiff clearly satisfies the second prong of the Wheeler test as well. The Board as much as concedes this.

OAKLYN VILLAS URBAN RENEWAL LLC v. BOROUGH OF OAKLYN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 24, 2023

Plaintiffs argue further that “Defendants and the Borough worked together to delay, complicate, and prevent the proposed sale of Oaklyn Manor to a qualified buyer.” … the United States, or any substantive rights, privileged or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of this State, or whose exercise or enjoyment of those substantive rights, privileges or immunities has been

Weinstein v. Paul Revere Insurance

15 F. Supp. 2d 552 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 23, 1998

Under certain circumstances, disability insurance benefits may fall within the definition of “employee welfare benefit plans,” and thus qualify as a “plan” under the civil enforcement provision of ERISA. … Paul Revere has clearly satisfied its burden. It is undisputed that factor one is not satisfied.

BUSSINELLI v. TOWNSHIP OF MAHWAH

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

Count Three alleged that Defendants conspired against Plaintiffs to deprive them of their privileges and immunities in violation of 42 U.S.C. § 1985. (Id. ¶ 186.) … Any public or false statement that would qualify as a stigma to their reputation is absent from the Amended Complaint. (See Opp. at 35-37.)

White v. Williams

208 F.R.D. 123 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 10, 2002

Predominance To establish predominance, Plaintiffs must establish “that questions of law or fact common to the members of the class predominate over any questions affecting only individual members.” … Finally, the proposed class counsel are all qualified and experienced with class action litigation and it *131 does not appear that any of the named Plaintiffs have interests that are antagonistic to other class members.