Case law

Williams v. American Cyanamid

164 F.R.D. 608 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 20, 1995

In March 1992, Whitney was diagnosed with Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (“AIDS”), an infectious, blood-borne and fatal disease for which there is no cure. … The presence of HIV-2 and SIV has no probative value in establishing a causal link, defendants contend, unless HIV-2 or SIV can somehow mutate into HIV-1.

MOYA v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 2020

Thus, “[i]f a proposed amendment is not clearly futile, then denial of leave to amend is improper.” … Plaintiff argues that United’s claim would be futile because he had access to the information and documents to carry out his 4 Plaintiff claims to be immune under 18 U.S.C. § 1833(b)(1) governing immunity from liability

EDWARDS

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

The litigant seeking IFP status must “provide the [Court] with the financial information it need[s] to make a determination as to whether he qualifie[s] for in forma pauperis status.” Freeman v. … Of course, the establishment of subject matter jurisdiction requires discernible allegations and claims, thus its lack in N.J. Parole Board.

CARMICHAEL v. THOMSON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 3, 2020

To establish a prima facie case of racial discrimination for failure to promote, a plaintiff must establish that: (1) he belongs to a protected category; (2) he applied … That is, if Plaintiff applied to be Captain, then he was clearly rejected as well, since he did not get that position.

MCGUINNESS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 2, 2026

suggesting he has not been provided sufficient legal assistance in the form of legal aid or a law library, he will not be able to make out a claim for denial of access to the courts unless he alleges facts establishing … By Plaintiff’s own admission, however, he has engaged in self-harm both in and out of restrictive housing units which do not appear to be clearly tied to restrictive housing so much as they appear to be a response to Plaintiff

New Jersey State Chamber of Commerce v. Hughey

600 F. Supp. 606 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 3, 1985

The Act clearly asserts jurisdiction over occupational safety and health issues as to which a federal standard is in effect. … Data not qualifying for either the 10-year period of exclusive use or the 15-year period of compensation may be considered by. EPA without limitation. § 3(e)(1)(D)(iii).

In Re Donald J. Trump Casino Securities Litigation

793 F. Supp. 543 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 2, 1992

Having established the legal framework in which to analyze the prospectus at issue here, we now turn to apply that framework. V. … For example, the prospectus clearly stated that there was no history of earnings at the Taj; that operations at the Taj would be “subject to all of the risks inherent in the establishment of a new business enterprise;” that

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Mylan Inc.

106 F. Supp. 3d 456 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 23, 2015

Sept. 29, 2014), and must establish “with reasonable particularity sufficient contacts between the defendant and the forum state.” Mellon Bank (E) PSFS, Nat’l Ass’n v. … Indeed, International Shoe itself clearly reflects that the Supreme Court’s jurisdictional determinations related to cases where “no consent to be sued or authorization to an agent to accept service of process has been given

Waterloov Gutter Protection System Co. v. Absolute Gutter Protection, L.L.C.

64 F. Supp. 2d 398 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 28, 1999

The litigation privilege is firmly established in New Jersey case law. The privilege protects, as absolutely immune from liability, statements by attorneys made in the course of judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings. … On the one side are eáses involving underlying transactions clearly within the ambit of the CFA. In these cases, New Jersey courts have been willing to extend liability to professionals.

United States v. Tzavah Urban Renewal Corp.

696 F. Supp. 1013 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 11, 1988

In order to qualify for the tax abatement offered such projects, the owners created Tzavah, an urban renewal corporation. 2 Hampel Affidavit, If 7. … Thus, the Government has established a reasonable probability of success on the merits. B.

Tomasi v. Twp. of Long Beach

364 F. Supp. 3d 376 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2019

Spirito , 723 F.2d 1003 (1st Cir. 1983) (recognizing that the waiver of sovereign immunity found in 5 U.S.C. § 702 "is expressly limited to actions brought 'in a court of the United States' "). … Plaintiffs have standing because the record clearly indicates the taking of their properties occurred because of the challenged regulation.

United States v. Rebelo

358 F. Supp. 2d 400 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 2, 2005

[the INS] is enforcing the public policy established by Congress.”). … Thus, Rebelo does not qualify for the safeharbor provided by 8 U.S.C. § 1182 (a)(2)(A)(ii)(II). C.

United States v. Eli Lilly & Co.

24 F.R.D. 285 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 8, 1959

The defendants further contend that the seller’s market which obtained during the first two years of production of the vaccine was destined to diminish rapidly once mass immunization of the *291 population was achieved and … Socony-Vaeuum Oil Co., 310 U.S. 150 , at page 230, 60 S.Ct. 811 , at page 847, 84 L.Ed. 1129 : ‘While the offer was not wholly irrelevant to the issues, it was clearly collateral.

Rivera v. Washington Mutual Bank

637 F. Supp. 2d 256 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 10, 2009

The answer clearly cannot be no jurisdiction. … Assuming that the mortgage and note are “consumer contracts” to which the TCCWNA applies, Plaintiffs have not identified which provisions of either document allegedly violate a clearly established right of Plaintiffs or responsibility

United States v. Article of Drug Consisting of 2,000 Cartons, More or Less, Each Containing 2 Empty Vials and 2 Bottles of Liquid, and 1 Insert, Labeled in Part: "Poison OVA II Contains Hydrochloric Acid

414 F. Supp. 660 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 16, 1975

On the other hand, the Schick Test, which involves the intrader mal injection of a dilute toxin, is an “in vivo” diagnostic procedure to determine susceptibility or immunity to diphtheria. … The standards are essentially professionally established.

Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts, Inc. v. Mirage Resorts Inc.

963 F. Supp. 395 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 1, 1997

Clearly, Trump recognizes that, at present, there are no federal funding sources identified in the Road Agreement. … Assuming federal funding, Trump states a claim under § 7604(a)(3), however, only if the Westside Connector qualifies as a “major emitting facility” within the meaning of the Clean Air Act.

Katinsky v. Radio Shack Division of Tandy Corp.

524 F. Supp. 807 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 16, 1980

Plaintiff must establish the following elements in order to prove fraud in the inducement under New Jersey law. … The only expert testimony was that of the defendant, and said expert clearly indicated that in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, that it was appropriate, bearing in mind that various profit centers

EDWARDS

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

The litigant seeking IFP status must “provide the [Court] with the financial information it need[s] to make a determination as to whether he qualifie[s] for in forma pauperis status.” Freeman v. … Of course, the establishment of subject matter jurisdiction requires discernible allegations and claims, thus its lack in N.J. Parole Board.

FOOTE v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 4, 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 the … Because Petitioner’s claim in this matter is clearly without merit, no hearing is necessary to resolve this matter. 2.

FLORES v. CAMDEN COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 6, 2025

Defendants also argue they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Id. pp. 29, 20.) II. … (citing Monell, 463 U.S. at 694). 6 As summary judgment will be granted in favor of the individual defendants, it is unnecessary to address their qualified immunity argument beyond noting that the evidence viewed in