Case law

BELIN v. O'NEILL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 3, 2019

. § 1983 provides a cause of action against ‘every person who, under color of any statute of any State subjects or causes to be subjected, any citizen to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured … Plaintiff argues that she “adequately plead . . . policies and procedures that the jail had in effect, which were clearly violated,” presumably by the COs referenced in the TAC. (Opp. Br.

PARAMOUNT RESIDENTIAL MORTGAGE GROUP, INC. v. NATIONWIDE MORTGAGE BANKERS, INC.

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

Aug. 25, 2022) (in case involving dispute between two lending companies, the court found that “Plaintiff's customer lists and information qualify as trade secrets”). … Moreover, it is clearly established that pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 408, evidence of settlement offers may not be used to prove or disprove the validity of a party’s claim. Sinclair Cattle Co. v.

HALL v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 24, 2023

DISCUSSION Section 2255 provides in relevant part that: [a] prisoner in custody under sentence of a court established by Act of Congress … As Petitioner correctly points out, Taylor also stands for the proposition that whether a completed Hobbs Act robbery does qualify requires application of the so- called “categorical approach

In Re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation

338 F. Supp. 2d 517 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 29, 2004

Furthermore, “[u]nder Rule 12(c), like Rule 12(b)(6), judgment will not be granted unless the movant clearly establishes that no material issue of fact remains to be resolved and that he is entitled to judgment as a matter … A patent affords no immunity for a monopoly not fairly or plainly within the grant.”).

United States Ex Rel. Smith v. Yeager

336 F. Supp. 1287 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 13, 1971

Clearly the Prosecutor at 10:00 a. m. had sufficient information to charge Smith with murder, and to have him taken before a committing magistrate. … Use of the verbal acknowledgement in order to qualify the Ehrenbeek transcript for admission in evidence as a written confession violated the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

In re Mercedes-Benz Tele Aid Contract Litigation

257 F.R.D. 46 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 24, 2009

Under that standard, Plaintiffs must establish that the proposed class meets all four of the requirements outlined in Rule 23(a) and qualifies under at least one of the three sections of Rule 23(b). … New Jersey is clearly the site of the alleged wrongdoing in this case.

Resolution Trust Corp. v. Spagnoli

811 F. Supp. 1005 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 8, 1993

Those acts are clearly in breach of his fiduciary duty entitling the RTC, as the successor of City Federal, to a judgment for breach of fiduciary duty. 4. … Even if true loans they be, they are not the type of legally enforceable obligations that qualify as an antecedent debt for fraudulent conveyance purposes. See In re Fleet, 89 B.R. 420, 426 (E.D.Pa.1988). 18.

Buying for the Home, LLC v. Humble Abode, LLC

459 F. Supp. 2d 310 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 20, 2006

The Court finds that these allegations clearly satisfy the Lanham Act’s “use” requirement. … Specifically, “a district court must make a finding of culpable conduct on the part of the losing party, such as bad faith, fraud, malice, or knowing infringement, before a case qualifies as ‘exceptional.’ ” Id.

Burger-Fischer v. DeGussa Ag

65 F. Supp. 2d 248 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 21, 1999

This enactment was designed to carry forward and formalize the previously established restitution programs. … This assumption is not in contradiction to cases defendants have cited representing efforts to impose liability on governmental entities in the face of the Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act, 28 U.S.C. § 1601 , et seq.; Argentine

Adams v. Madison Realty & Development, Inc.

746 F. Supp. 419 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 20, 1990

These arguments are irrelevant and contrary to established law. … RTC need not establish holder status under the UCC to benefit from the protection of § 1823(e).

In re Sears

425 F. Supp. 1190 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 7, 1977

Were such an investigation to establish for us those facts upon which the Supreme Court of New Jersey relied, I would vote to disbar. … Courts are no strangers to contrition and repentance after conviction, nor are they immune from the sympathetic stirring at the sight of one who has fallen so far.

KAPROWSKI v. ESTI FOODS, LLC

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

Third, Plaintiff alleges, and the Court accepts as true, that he was qualified for his former position at Esti. And not only does Plaintiff allege he was qualified. He claims to have been a stellar employee. … Plaintiff created new sales routes, hired and trained new salespeople, established and managed Esti’s product demonstration team, and directed Esti’s promotional efforts. (Id. ¶ 21).

STAR DIALYSIS, LLC v. ETHICARE ADVISORS, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 2020

While confidential information is not privileged or immune from discovery per se, courts are generally willing to weigh and balance such concerns when considering proportionality and the need for such discovery in a case … Here, we have clearly sensitive business information; therefore, the question becomes: how relevant is it to the case at hand and should it be produced despite its obvious sensitivity and the non-party business interests

KWANZAA v. TELL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 6, 2020

To establish liability under § 1983, “a plaintiff must show that the defendants, acting under color of law, violated the plaintiff’s federal constitutional or statutory rights, and thereby caused … Property ownership “is clearly a factor to be considered in determining whether an individual’s Fourth Amendment rights have been violated . . .

BOWIE v. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 22, 2019

Supp. 1344, 1371 (D.N.J. 1990), aff’d, 932 F.2d 960 (3d Cir. 1991) (finding the plaintiff failed to establish a prima facie case for discrimination because he had not established he was qualified for his job in light of … In fact, Bowie’s opposition brief fails to distinguish between claims and merely argues he “clearly establish a prima facie case of retaliatory termination, and interference under FMLA.” (ECF No. 35 at 22.)

Delaware, Lackawanna and Western R. Co. v. Kingsley

189 F. Supp. 39 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 16, 1960

lack of jurisdiction; (4) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; (5) improper joinder of Kings-ley as Deputy Director; (6) non-joinder of the State of New Jersey as an indispensable party; (7) sovereign immunity … The Supreme Court found the evidence insufficient “clearly to establish that the state board entertained *49 or is chargeable with any purpose or design to discriminate.” Sioux City Bridge Co. v.

VENTRICE v. LEXINGTON INSURANCE COMPANY

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

Qualified Personal Residence Trust (“QPRT”). … Ridenour’s January 31, 2014 letter, the factual allegations of the parties in this case clearly evidence that Mr. Falk was providing legal services.” Id. at 117.

Regency Oldsmobile, Inc. v. General Motors Corp.

723 F. Supp. 250 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 28, 1989

This charge card program, administered by the National Bank of Delaware (NBD), enabled qualified customers to finance the retail selling price of the plan. … CONCLUSION Regency has failed to meet its burden in establishing the viability of its federal and state antitrust claims.

ROONEY v. NVR, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 13, 2020

Notwithstanding, the Supreme Court of New Jersey ruled that the employee met his burden and established he was qualified and performing his job by showing that he “had significant experience as a sales executive prior … Instead, Plaintiff concludes that he has “clearly” established element four, arguing that the employment decision took place under the circumstances that give rise to an inference of unlawful discrimination.

FALLAS v. DIGERONIMO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 26, 2024

Plaintiff submitted two opposition filings with additional details to establish subject-matter jurisdiction. (ECF Nos. 9, 10.) … “[T]o satisfy the well-pleaded complaint rule, ‘[a] right or immunity created by the Constitution or laws of the United States must be an element, and an essential one, of the plaintiff’s cause of action.’”