Case law

Burke v. Donington, Karcher, Salmond, Ronan & Rainone, P.A. (In Re Donington, Karcher, Salmond, Ronan & Rainone, P.A.)

194 B.R. 750 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 16, 1996

Clearly, this action may not be deemed to be within the “core” jurisdiction of the bankruptcy court. … Further, issues of state law clearly predominate.

THE ESTATE OF LUIS E. ANDUJAR v. COUNTY OF CUMBERLAND

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

All supervisory officers, including Defendants Smith and Warren, ignored Andujar’s clearly visible signs of illness. (Compl. ¶ 15.) … immunity, Plaintiff has failed to plead Cumberland County caused the constitutional violation.”

Eason v. Linden Avionics, Inc.

706 F. Supp. 311 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 12, 1989

This wasteful abuse of diversity jurisdiction is clearly not an appropriate use of issue preclusion. … The rules on when a state may require a foreign corporation to qualify if it wishes to do business there are derived from the Commerce Clause.

FERNANDEZ v. UNITED STATES NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2024

Second, the United States is immune from suit under the New Jersey Landowner Liability Act (NJLLA), N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:42A-3. Finally, Jaime Fernandez did not exhaust his administrative remedies. II. … See Abunabba, 676 F.3d at 335 (finding that a previous version of NPS policies “clearly vest local NPS officials with broad discretion to develop appropriate responses to natural hazards”).

SBK Catalogue Partnership v. Orion Pictures Corp.

723 F. Supp. 1053 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 13, 1989

Thus, the fact that the composers are beneficial owners who have standing to bring a suit against alleged infringers does not immunize them from liability for any infringement they may commit. … the “standard subpublishing agreement” submitted by the composers as proof of the terms of the actual agreement merely permits the arrangement, adaptation, translation and creation of new lyrics by the subpublisher and clearly

431 E PALISADE AVENUE REAL ESTATE, LLC v. CITY OF ENGLEWOOD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 19, 2023

Moreover, Defendants assert Plaintiffs are not qualified individuals with disabilities under the ADA. (Id. at 26.) … The Equal Protection Act prohibits the subjection of others, under color of law, to “the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured by the Constitution” of the United States. 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

Eagle Snacks, Inc. v. Nabisco Brands, Inc.

625 F. Supp. 571 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 20, 1985

To qualify, a respondent must have used or purchased in the past year an array of five different products, several of which are wholly unrelated — e.g., cellophane and nuts. … Accordingly, a number of qualified nut users and consumers may have been eliminated from the Ross universe.

LEJON-TWIN EL v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY-JOHN JAY HOFFMAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 2022

fundamental right to establish a religion and freely exercise therein.” … immunity or that the County Defendants are immune from vicarious liability under § 1983.

SMART v. COUNTY OF GLOUCESTER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 3, 2022

defendant is entitled to qualified immunity for claims based on communications made in good faith to state authorities “for the prevention and detection of crime.” Wright-Phillips v. … immunity, pursuant to the litigation privilege.

Heffernan v. City of Paterson

2 F. Supp. 3d 563 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 5, 2014

As established above, the law in this Circuit is clear, at least as to a First Amendment freedom-of-speech claim. … Nor does it help establish that the reasoning of Am-brose should be confined to freedom-of-speech claims.

Marks v. Struble

347 F. Supp. 2d 136 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 18, 2004

A plaintiff must establish that a defendant had knowledge of the contract at issue. Don King Prods., Inc. v. Douglas, 742 F.Supp. 741, 775-76 (S.D.N.Y.1990). … Attorneys, thus, are “immunized from liability [for tortious interference with contract] under the shield afforded attorneys in advising their clients, even when such advice is erroneous” or negligent. Beatie v.

Township of Belleville v. Federal Transit Administration

30 F. Supp. 2d 782 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 9, 1998

Actions in which the significance of the environmental impact is not clearly established. All actions that are not Class I or Class II are Class III. … Those regulations provide that, where it is not clearly established whether a project proposed for FTA funding will have a significant impact, an EA is to be performed to determine the appropriate environmental document required

Gross v. German Foundation Industrial Initiative

320 F. Supp. 2d 235 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 8, 2004

The delay in distributing the second tranche of payments qualifies as an actual injury, whereas the reduced amount expected in the second tranche is an imminent injury. … Clearly, intergovernmental efforts have continued beyond the Joint Statement and Executive Agreement.

WAHAB v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 2022

These are also insufficient to qualify as adverse employment actions. … Section 1983 permits private civil actions for damages against any person who, acting under the color of state law, deprives another of a right, privilege, or immunity secured by the Constitution or federal law.

Del Sontro v. Cendant Corp., Inc.

223 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 2002

It is clearly established that equitable tolling is inapplicable to the one-and-three year limitation periods of securities fraud actions. See Lampf, Pleva, Lipkind, Prupis & Petigrow v. … See Napier, 855 F.2d at 1091 (filing “of a claim clearly precluded by the statutes of limitations ... was legally frivolous”); Slater v.

United States v. Motzell

199 F. Supp. 192 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 25, 1961

This appears quite clearly in the discussion of this portion of the TaftHartley Act when the matter was before the Congress.” … If, however, tbe Hiring Engineer does not, within 72 hours exclusive of Sundays and holidays, obtain competent and qualified personnel as and when wanted by the Company, the Company will hire from any source.

ALINTOFF v. BUCK III.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 22, 2024

In New Jersey, a student with a qualifying disability is entitled to an IEP, which establishes the rationale for a student's educational placement and serves as the basis for program implementation. … Notwithstanding H.A.’s qualifying disability, the evidence and testimony provided during the Hearing established that H.A.’s disability does not unfavorably affect his education performance and he no longer requires

MOFFETT v. RISCH

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

Defendant also argues that Plaintiff's pleadings fail to allege sufficient facts to aver either that the garnishments against him were improper, or to overcome qualified immunity. at 14-21.) … Plaintiff’s brief argues that the OCSS, as a “TV-D” agency, does not qualify as a state agency. (ECF No. 13 {J □□ 10.)

STEVENS v. SCOTT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 2024

A plaintiff may establish supervisory liability under § 1983 by showing: (1) liability based on an establishment of policies, practices, or customs that directly caused the constitutional violation; or (2) personal liability … “Inmates clearly retain protections afforded by the First Amendment . . . including its directive that no law shall prohibit the free exercise of religion.” O’Lone v.

Carroll v. United Air Lines, Inc.

7 F. Supp. 2d 516 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 10, 1998

When confronted with a motion to remand, the removing party has the burden of establishing the propriety of removal. See Boyer v. … In dicta, the court explained “[e]ven if the district court’s sua sponte action qualifies as a motion under ...