Case law

Fidelity & Guaranty Insurance Underwriters, Inc. v. Omega Flex, Inc.

936 F. Supp. 2d 441 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 26, 2013

Additionally, the seller of a product may qualify as a manufacturer to the extent the “product seller designs, formulates, produces, creates, makes, packages, labels or constructs the product before its sale[.]” Id. … A product seller seeking immunity under Section 2A:58C-9(b) bears the burden of demonstrating that it is not subject to liability under any of the exceptions to seller immunity set forth in subsections (c) or (d).

Eastern, Inc. v. Shelly's of Delaware, Inc.

721 F. Supp. 649 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 8, 1989

Defendant United States Postal Service (“USPS”) is an independent establishment of the executive branch of the government of the United States. … Allowing subcontractors to proceed directly to district court would clearly produce the same problems Congress sought to foreclose.

LYLES

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

[O]nce the defendant[] ha[s] started things off by raising qualified immunity, who has to come forward and show what the “clearly … then the defendant gets qualified immunity.

PETLOCK v. NADROWSKI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 29, 2021

An award of qualified immunity protects a government official from civil liability and suit “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … establish a right for purposes of qualified immunity.

NDUAGUBU

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 16, 2025

And at this stage, “qualified immunity will be upheld . . . only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.” Leveto v. … to qualified immunity, if the alleged rights-violation was not “clearly established” at the time of the incident.

GROHS

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

“Qualified immunity protects government officials … from liability for damages as long as their conduct does not violate ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known … When assessing a government official’s qualified immunity claims, a court must decide whether (1) “the official’s conduct violated a constitutional or federal right”; and (2) “the right at issue was “clearly established

United States v. Rohm and Haas Co.

939 F. Supp. 1157 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 27, 1996

Such counterclaims are clearly barred. … Keystone Sanitation clearly states that the Third Circuit has not decided this issue. Other cases cited by Owens-Illinois which allow recoupment in CERCLA actions based upon waiver of immunity are distinguishable.

Bennett v. City of Atlantic City

288 F. Supp. 2d 675 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 2003

The fact that City firefighters are career civil employees whose hiring and promotional tests are established and administered by the DOP, does not establish the level of enmeshment required to give the City immunity from … As to Plaintiffs’ federal claims, the United States Supreme Court has clearly stated that 42 U.S.C. § 1983 does not “override States’ Eleventh Amendment immunity.” Quern v.

Josephson v. Joslin

38 F.R.D. 344 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 7, 1965

. ¶ 12.08 at pp. 2245-46, concisely summarizes the *346 well-established rule governing dismissal under F.R.Civ.P. 12(b) (6): “ ‘A [complaint] may be dismissed on motion if clearly without any merit; and this want of merit … Here the alleged facts clearly demonstrate the incidence of a legal duty.

DIAZ

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

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials performing discretionary functions “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly … The clearly established inquiry must be undertaken with specificity. As discussed above, qualified immunity protects “all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.”

Orthopedic Specialists of New Jersey PA v. Horizon Blue Cross/Blue Shield

518 F. Supp. 2d 128 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 3, 2007

This split of authority is largely driven by the nature of the plaintiffs claim, and does not occur along a clearly defined line. … Although not dispositive, the Fifth Circuit’s immunity analysis is relevant to this Court’s present inquiry because of the close relationship between the "government function" analysis for purposes of immunity, and the “direct

Brown v. Hilton

492 F. Supp. 771 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 10, 1980

Supreme Court decisions have established general principles to inform our evaluation of the constitutionality of prison restrictions. … QUALIFIED IMMUNITY Defendants submit that summary judgment should be granted in their favor on the basis of their qualified immunity from liability in a suit for damages under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , citing Procunier v.

Johnson v. Guhl

91 F. Supp. 2d 754 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 7, 2000

Federal Mine Safety and Health Review Commission, 177 F.3d 1042, 1049 (C.A.D.C.1999) (“where attorney’s fees are provided for by statute, as here, qualified immunity has no application.”) 5. … First, it is clearly established that once an individual is a recipient of direct Medicaid benefits, such benefits are a protected property interest that cannot be withdrawn without giving the recipient notice and an opportunity

REID

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 2025

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields police officers from liability unless they violated clearly established rights. … Although the question of qualified immunity is generally a question of law, “a genuine issue of material fact will preclude summary judgment on qualified immunity.” Giles v.

Becker v. Sherwin Williams

717 F. Supp. 288 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 17, 1989

candidate than, or even as qualified as, the younger persons hired by Sher-win Williams. … Plaintiff has already conceded in his Affidavit in Opposition that the doctrine of sovereign immunity precludes him from obtaining a money judgment against the EEOC.

In Re Fennelly

212 B.R. 61 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 16, 1997

of authority establishes that it can, and here has, waived this immunity by filing a proof of claim against the Debtor’s estate.”). … Findings of fact, whether based on oral or documentary evidence, shall not be set aside unless clearly erroneous.... ” 11 U.S.C.A. Rule 8013 (West Supp.1993).

Sentner v. Amtrak

540 F. Supp. 557 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 1, 1982

The Corporation will not be an agency or establishment of the United States Government. … Clearly, both the district court and court of appeals disposed of the claims on the basis of evidentiary insufficiency, and did not reach the issue of Amtrak’s claim of immunity, despite some reference to that argument in

Medical Society of New Jersey v. Herr

191 F. Supp. 2d 574 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 21, 2002

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue, in the alternative, that Doe’s § 1983 claim for damages against defendant Herr should be dismissed under the doctrine of qualified immunity. Recently, in Saucier v. … (“If no constitutional right would have been violated were the allegations established, there is no necessity for further inquiries concerning qualified immunity.”)

Suburban Trails, Inc. v. New Jersey Transit Corp.

620 F. Supp. 1383 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 1985

That requirement has clearly been met in this case. … The court therefore declines to adopt plaintiffs’ suggestion that it qualify the state action immunity doctrine with a requirement that the state policy being promoted be shown valid under the supremacy clause before it may

United States v. La Duca

447 F. Supp. 779 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 10, 1978

The transcript of trial clearly indicates that La Duca had no genuine wish to put Neiman on the witness stand. … If he admits saying it there may be no need to call the lawyers for you will establish through the witness himself.