Case law

Sabol v. BD. OF ED. OF TP. OF WILLINGBORO, CTY.

510 F. Supp. 892 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 27, 1981

Without more, it cannot be said that these statements provide clear evidence of Congressional intent to establish a broad ban on employment discrimination against the handicapped. … These cases clearly indicate that teacher discrimination is equivalent to discrimination against students only where broad policies of hiring and assignment are involved, not where a solitary case of employment discrimination

Gudiel-Soto v. United States

761 F. Supp. 2d 234 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 25, 2011

An attorney’s complete failure to provide advice and “affirmative misadvice” both qualify as ineffective assistance of counsel. Id. … Third Circuit precedent clearly demonstrates that Gudiel-Soto cannot meet this test. In United States v.

BERUTTI v. WOLFSON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 4, 2023

Id. at 549 (explaining that “[a]ny significant disciplinary in-court restraint clearly (a) impinges on the lawyer’s duty to deliver untrammeled and independent service of forensic representation and (b) harms the practitioner … Ranger Cellular, 348 F.3d at 1050 (explaining that the opportunity to compete is an illusory benefit where the plaintiff cannot show that they would have been qualified to compete for the opportunity).

PASKAS v. UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, INC.

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

Bermudes was not qualified to perform her job when, in or around March 2021, Ms. … Without additional allegations that clearly link UPS’s failure to ensure that Ms.

8 ERIE ST. JC LLC v. CITY OF JERSEY CITY

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

Of course, that is not to say that high-level public officials are immune from depositions. They are not. Rather, courts must look to whether extraordinary circumstances warrant their deposition. … Constitution, which states, in relevant part, that: “No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States[.]” U.S. CONST. amend. XIV, § 1.

MAHER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 27, 2026

Here, the Court is satisfied class counsel is well-qualified and more than experienced enough to represent the class. … But the Court must “clearly articulate the reasons” for an award. Id.

Lusardi v. Xerox Corp.

118 F.R.D. 351 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 5, 1987

This example, which is clearly unique to Mr. Kenney, points up facts which argue against plaintiffs’ contention that all of the plaintiffs are “similarly situated.” … In order to establish a prima facie case of age discrimination, a plaintiff must prove that he (1) was discharged; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) was within the protected class at the time of discharge; (4) was replaced

Cremen v. Harrah's Marina Hotel Casino

680 F. Supp. 150 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 22, 1988

They are based, respectively, upon principles of Missouri and Georgia law, which apparently do not follow the same definitional standards for compensable incidents as does New Jersey. 3 *155 Clearly then, plaintiff could … He gains immunity from common-law suit, even though he be negligent, and is left with a limited and determined liability in all cases of work-connected injury.

American Cyanamid Co. v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

729 F. Supp. 1018 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 30, 1989

A plaintiff must establish both items (1) and (2) above in order to obtain a preliminary injunction. … a similarity between the suffixes ‘VAX’ and ‘IMMUNE.’ ( 800 F.2d at 308 ).

MEJIA CALLES v. TSOUKARIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 16, 2020

The movant bears the burden of establishing “the threshold for the first two ‘most critical’ factors . . . … May 15, 2020) (denying release to petitioner at ECCF whose alleged medical conditions did “not qualify as CDC risk factors for COVID-19”); Carlos M. D. v. Anderson, Civ. No. 20-3908, 2020 WL 2487646, at *9 (D.N.J.

Karp v. Collins

310 F. Supp. 627 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 12, 1970

While applying to the universe of crimes and petty offenses, the statute makes no attempt to limit “place” to a specific or identifiable location or an area which could be deemed its curtilage, nor does it establish some … the hearers, since the interest we seek to protect is freedom from present nuisance rather than freedom from anticipated violence. * * * A rule that words may be punished only if they tend to provoke violence would give immunity

Franco v. Connecticut General Life Insurance

818 F. Supp. 2d 792 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 23, 2011

CIGNA’s argument relies on too narrow a view of who or what may qualify as an administrator within the meaning of ERISA. … Their complaint clearly alleges throughout that their CIGNA plan is governed by ERISA.

Altana Pharma AG v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

532 F. Supp. 2d 666 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 6, 2007

This Court finds that Plaintiffs have failed to establish irreparable harm. … In both of these cases, the Federal Circuit indicated that the district court did not clearly err in finding that the plaintiff established irreparable harm by arguing some of the same types of harms Plaintiffs allege here

Kitchnefsky v. National Rent-A-Fence of America, Inc.

88 F. Supp. 2d 360 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2000

As discussed supra, this does not qualify as an irretrievable loss of rights. … Br.) 7 .Fireman's Fund argues that this letter did not qualify to serve notice upon the insurer that National was seeking coverage. The Court disagrees.

WOOLERY v. ATLANTIC CAPES FISHERIES, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2020

This is an issue of material fact, because establishing the nature and extent of Plaintiff’s duties will serve to establish or eliminate his seaman status, and thus his ability … This is an issue of material fact, again, because establishing whether the vessel was “in navigation” will serve to establish or eliminate his seaman status, and thus his ability

H.R. v. WEST WINDSOR-PLAINSBORO BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 25, 2023

Plaintiffs state that the ALJ’s assertion that at least six students qualified for supplemental reading instruction was incorrect, and instead only four students qualified. (Pls.” … Plaintiffs contend that the ALJ did not base his decision on “all credible, objective evidence,” which Plaintiffs maintain clearly showed S.R. required further special education services. (Pls.

Lighthouse Institute for Evangelism, Inc. v. City of Long Branch

406 F. Supp. 2d 507 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 27, 2005

This was clearly not the intent of Congress. See 146 Cong. Rec. … Equal Protection To establish an Equal Protection claim, the Mission must establish, under Cleburne v.

REID v. DOE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 7, 2024

The possession of a qualified disability, however, is the sine qua non of a claim under either of those two statutes. See, e.g., Furgess v. Pa. Dep’t of Corr., 933 F.3d 285, 288-89 (d Cir. 2019). … Instead, Plaintiff suggests that the taking of the funds was contrary to established policies and procedures.

DEY v. INNODATA, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 24, 2022

Plaintiff cannot establish that he was subjected to a hostile work environment. … And where, as here, the question is whether the plaintiff was qualified for the position that he actually held (rather than, for example, whether he was qualified for a promotion), recruitment and hiring by a defendant-

Hovsons, Inc. v. Secretary of Interior of US

519 F. Supp. 434 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 14, 1981

This organization complains that it has among its membership persons who do not qualify for the so-called “Piney Exemption” which is part of the CMP. … The FEIS in this case “clearly addressed” plaintiff Coalition’s proffered alternative at 4.2-3. This is sufficient under NEPA. 2.