Case law

MILLS v. BYCK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 24, 2019

Based on his application, Plaintiff qualifies for in forma pauperis. See D.E. 1-2. However, Plaintiff did pay Defendants a $5,000 retainer, which appears to undercut his current claim of indigency. … 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

Landsman & Funk, P.C. v. Skinder-Strauss Associates

636 F. Supp. 2d 359 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 2009

Here, a conflict of laws is clearly presented for the reasons discussed above. Accordingly, the Court must “turn to the Restatement analysis.” Id. at 144, 962 A.2d 453 . … Having established the presumption that New York law should apply, the Court must consider New Jersey’s contacts in this case, guided by § 1J5.

GNOC CORP. v. Aboud

715 F. Supp. 644 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 1989

circumstances are presented: ‘Duty’ is not a rigid formalism according to the standards of a simpler society, immune to the equally compelling needs of the present order; duty must of necessity adjust to the changing social … Such a conclusion is but a logical extension of well established doctrine and pre-existing law, although its application to the facts at bar is novel.

GRAVES-DOYLE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 22, 2022

The ALJ paid particular attention to Listings 1.04 (Disorders of the Spine), 14.09 (Inflammatory Arthritis), 9.0 (Endocrine Disorders), as well as Section 14 (Immune System Disorders) of the Listings. … Rather, the “ALJ satisfies this standard by ‘clearly evaluating the available medical evidence in the record and then setting forth that evaluation in an opinion, even where the ALJ did not identify or analyze the most

In re Galena Biopharma, Inc.

336 F. Supp. 3d 378 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 21, 2018

"Neither the language of [Item 303] nor the SEC's interpretive releases construing it suggest that it was intended to establish a private right of action ...." Id. I of course follow this controlling precedent. … Plaintiffs do not present clearly defined theories of liability and do not clearly connect each allegedly false statement to each theory.

GRANT v. WILLIAMS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 22, 2022

Despite claiming the Court made legal errors, Plaintiff does not articulate how the Court erred in its analysis of the Rooker-Feldman doctrine and sovereign immunity, nor in its analysis of … Although not clearly invoked by Plaintiff, Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 60(b)(2) does provides courts with the authority to grant relief from a final judgment based on “newly discovered evidence

United States v. Bryant

556 F. Supp. 2d 378 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 5, 2008

Here, in contrast, the Government cannot identify any clearly established fiduciary relationship or legal duty in either federal or state law between Murphy and Passaic County or its citizens. … Given that situation, this Court is unable to say that the Contract is clearly one for best efforts or clearly a firm fixed-price contract or clearly some *449 kind of hybrid.

Boehringer Ingelheim Vetmedica, Inc. v. Schering-Plough Corp.

166 F. Supp. 2d 19 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 21, 2001

The court finds that two of these references clearly provided the kind of minimal background material on the relationship of the virus to the vaccine that was permitted by the court. … Dubovi made in a single sentence of his testimony, in response to the question “how would a pig’s immune system perceive the ATCC-VR2332 from Boehringer and the 2525 from Schering?” Dr.

PRITCHARD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 29, 2026

Plaintiff contends that Defendants pulled her credit report to evaluate whether she qualified for a medical loan, for which she never applied. Id. … authority; and WHEREAS GreenSky further argues that the November 7, 2025, Letter Order must be reversed because class-related discovery “will not enable Plaintiff to establish

Crocker v. First Hudson Associates

569 F. Supp. 97 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 22, 1982

If that element be established, plaintiff must next establish that the defendant sued deprived her of that right “acting under color” of a State statute. See Flagg v. … The legislative history of what is now N.J.S.A. 2A:18-53, as well as other considerations to be noted, clearly point the other way.

D'Argenzio v. Bank of America Corp.

877 F. Supp. 2d 202 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 9, 2012

Further, “a moving party cannot establish its entitlement to summary judgment by pointing to evidence or a lack of evidence in a reply brief, as opposed to a principal brief.” Harbour Cove Marine Services v. … On an annual income of $15,786.00, and no other disclosed liquid assets from which to make payment, there can be no dispute that Plaintiffs could have ever qualified for the 2008 loan.

ERICKSON v. CITY OF NEWARK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 26, 2020

Mayview State Hosp., 293 F.3d 103, 114 n. 19 (3d Cir. 2002) (non-prisoner indigent plaintiffs are “clearly within the scope of § 1915(e)(2)”). See also Lopez v. … Police Department’s failure to promptly investigate her reports of breaking and entering, to establish a prima facie case Erickson must demonstrate that (1) the Newark Police Department deprived her of a federal right,

Chait v. Bernstein

645 F. Supp. 1092 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 8, 1986

On December 31, 1968, Ambassador established a qualified pension plan for its employees, entitled The Ambassador Insurance Company, Inc. Pension Trust (hereinafter “the pension plan” or “the plan”). … Clearly defendant is wearing more than one hat in his role as Ambassador’s receiver, and must act with diligence to insure that the potential for conflicts of interest is never in fact *1098 fulfilled.

ORTIZ v. WASTE MANAGEMENT, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 22, 2021

Under § 1915, this Court may excuse a litigant from prepayment of fees when the litigant “establish[es] that he is unable to pay the costs of his suit.” Walker v. … Plaintiff sufficiently establishes his inability to pay, and the Court grants his application to proceed in forma pauperis without prepayment of fees and costs.

ALSTON v. United States

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

A criminal defendant bears the burden of establishing his entitlement to § 2255 relief. See United States v. Davies, 394 F.3d 182, 189 (3d Cir. 2005). … In considering a motion to vacate a defendant’s sentence, “the court must accept the truth of the movant’s factual allegations unless they are clearly frivolous on the basis of the existing record.” United States v.

Schiavone Construction Co. v. Time, Inc.

619 F. Supp. 684 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 1985

Unlike absolute privileges, qualified privileges may be lost if abused, or if the underlying statements are motivated by legal malice. … Clearly, they do not.

BYRD v. FINLEY

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

Judicial immunity is extremely broad. … Plaintiff has provided no other facts would deprive Judge Kugler of judicial immunity, and the other allegations against Judge Kugler clearly relate to his judicial decisions in Plaintiff’s federal criminal matter, some

John Hancock Mut. Life Insurance v. United Office & Professional Workers of America

93 F. Supp. 296 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 9, 1950

The federal question must clearly appear on the face of the declaration or complaint as an essential and integral part of the plaintiff’s statement of his own case, not in anticipation of a defense that may be interposed … It does not set forth any right or immunity which would be supported if the Act be given one construction or effect and defeated if given another.

760 NEW BRUNSWICK URBAN RENEWAL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY v. NAVIGATORS SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 12, 2023

Clarios moved to dismiss Count Seven, arguing, in part, that its receipt of the remediation in progress waiver (“RIP Waiver”) from NJDEP immunized it from ISRA liability. … If a proposed amendment is not clearly futile, then denial of leave to amend is improper.

McKinnon v. Gonzales

642 F. Supp. 2d 410 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 24, 2009

The establishment of a prima facie case gives rise to a presumption that the employer unlawfully retaliated against the plaintiff. Id. at 342 . Once the plaintiff establishes ... … Nor does the Court find that Plaintiff has adduced evidence that AW Nichols exhibited retaliatory animus toward Plaintiff. 25 While the relationship between Plaintiff and AW Nichols was clearly strained, it is well-established