Case law

Stratechuk v. BOARD OF EDUC., SOUTH ORANGE-MAPLEWOOD SCHOOL DIST.

577 F. Supp. 2d 731 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 29, 2008

In other words, Defendants contend that "[t]he Policy, as written and currently interpreted, is clearly designed with the goal of avoiding potential Establishment Clause violations." (Defs.' Supporting Br. at 18.) … Clearly, this screening of musical selections required by the interpretation of Policy 2270 involves some entanglement with religion.

MARTIN v. CUMBERLAND BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 7, 2023

§ 1915(e}(2)(B) and dismiss any claim which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks relief from an immune defendant. … To plead a formal policy, the plaintiff must plead facts indicating that a decisionmaker with final authority established an applicable formal proclamation, policy, edict, or rule. Natale, 318 F.3d at 584.

Securities & Exchange Commission v. Lucent Technologies, Inc.

610 F. Supp. 2d 342 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 27, 2009

According to defendants, the architects of a fraudulent scheme, whose deception is communicated to the investing *360 markets through an unattributed misstatement in a public filing, would be immune from liability. … Even if it were, Dorn's naked assertions of good faith are insufficient to establish good faith as a matter of law. 11 .

Cammer v. Bloom

711 F. Supp. 1264 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 19, 1989

Poser, in his affidavit, demonstrates he is qualified to offer an expert opinion on the nature of securities markets. … (CCH) ¶ 95,469 at p. 99,376 (S.D.N.Y.1976) ("it seems clearly established that inactive directors, without more, cannot be controlling persons”). 54 .

Lombardi v. Cosgrove

7 F. Supp. 2d 481 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 1997

This case is clearly one of non-facially sex-based conduct, and thus, plaintiff must link Cos-grove’s comments to sex-based comments or conduct or show that only women suffered from the harassment. … The Court notes that that evidence would not satisfy the standard established in Buckley .

Liles v. Camden County Department of Corrections

225 F. Supp. 2d 450 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2002

These incidents establish a pattern of violence that resulted from prisoners getting splashed with urine as they slept on mattresses placed on the floors of cells next to toilets. … immunity.

FAKLA v. BOROUGH OF MIDDLESEX

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

The complaint does not clearly state the specific violations that are alleged to have been committed by the County. … Nor could he successfully make this argument, as it is well-established that when county prosecutors act in a law enforcement capacity, they act as agents of the State, not the County. Coleman v.

GUNDELL v. SLEEPY'S, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 28, 2023

[to] establish a violation under Section 15” of the TCCWNA. (ECF No. 147 at 10-12.) … B&C Towing, Inc., 240 N.J. 360, 384 (2020) (finding that plaintiffs could not state a cause of action under the TCCWNA for failing to establish elements one and two).

MASCARENHAS v. RUTGERS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 15, 2019

Accordingly, Plaintiff has put forth adequate evidence to establish that he is an “otherwise qualified individual” under the ADA. … - a case in which the plaintiff had provided compelling and detailed comparative evidence concerning the promotion application of a similarly-situated colleague not in the protected class - is clearly

United States v. Lane Labs-USA, Inc.

324 F. Supp. 2d 547 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 9, 2004

Undoubtedly, this is because MGN-3’s primary function is to enhance the activity of the immune system rather than to attack cancer cells directly. … The Government further claims that the Products are not generally recognized, among qualified experts, as safe and effective treatments for the those diseases.

BOYD v. RIGGS DISTLER AND COMPANY, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 29, 2022

In the absence of any qualified exception, an employer’s failure to restore an employee following a qualified leave constitutes an interference with the employee’s right to reinstatement under the FMLA. … See Pl.’s SMF at ¶ 33.2 This is a matter that clearly should be presented to a jury—not to a court on a motion for summary judgment. Cf. Donnelly v. Cap. Vision Servs., LLC, No. 20-4189, 2022 WL 17486361, at *8 (E.D.

Murillo v. Bambrick

508 F. Supp. 830 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 20, 1981

At the time she instituted the proceedings, however, she earned twenty-five to twenty-eight dollars per day as a domestic, and did not qualify as an indigent. … Div.1976), it clearly represented a much more liberal conception of divorce than had theretofore existed. B.

DOE v. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

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

Div. 2001) (holding Princeton entitled to immunity under the NJCIA). … The Third Circuit explained that “an entity qualifies for charitable immunity when it... was promoting [religious, charitable, or educational] objectives and [for non-profit] purposes at the time of the injury to

ABDUR-RAHEEM v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 27, 2025

severe hardship beyond the everyday incidents of prison life, he did not have a viable liberty interest in the outcome of this charge sufficient to establish a right to Due Process. … Likewise, although Defendants argue qualified immunity, they present no arguments as to this Due Process claim, and thus provide no basis for a finding of immunity in their current brief.

Arcuri v. Trump Taj Mahal Associates

154 F.R.D. 97 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 30, 1994

The attorney-client privilege, if an when attached to a communication (and excepting, of course, a valid waiver), is absolute, and there is no “balance” to be “tested,” and no “needs” test, as might be the case with a qualified … Also, any interviews conducted by O’Brien and Simonoff of union members would be, quite clearly, hearsay under no exception, and inadmissible under the rules.

RYAN

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

This waiver of sovereign immunity is limited though. “Because the Federal Tort Claims Act constitutes a waiver of sovereign immunity, the Act’s established procedures have been strictly construed.” Livera v. … Gaubert, 499 U.S. 315 (1991), the Supreme Court established a two- part test for determining whether the discretionary function should apply.

MASCARENHAS v. RUTGERS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 11, 2019

Accordingly, Plaintiff has put forth adequate evidence to establish that he is an “otherwise qualified individual” under the ADA. … - a case in which the plaintiff had provided compelling and detailed comparative evidence concerning the promotion application of a similarly-situated colleague not in the protected class - is clearly

Cherchi v. Mobil Oil Corp.

693 F. Supp. 156 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 18, 1988

According to the evaluations, Griffith, who at the time was forty, achieved the best performance; he received an overall rating of CE — (clearly exceeds job requirements). Id. … The complaint alleges Cherchi was ultimately replaced by less qualified employees who were under forty years of age.

CHILDREN'S HEALTH DEFENSE, INC. v. RUTGERS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 27, 2021

Defendants likewise reject her claims that she may be naturally immune to COVID-19 because there is currently no recognized mechanism for verifying a natural immunity. (Id. at 22- 23.) Ms. … Pinto cannot establish that she will suffer irreparable harm because she delayed before seeking relief. (Id. at 25.) Ms.

Parker v. Hahnemann University Hospital

234 F. Supp. 2d 478 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 18, 2002

The employer “must *489 clearly set forth, through the introduction of admissible evidence, the reasons for the [employee’s termination]” which show that the “plaintiff was rejected, or someone else was preferred, for a legitimate … Plaintiff has presented evidence that is sufficient to establish a prima facie case of discrimination under the FMLA.