Case law

GROCE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 16, 2026

The Kel Tec pistol in question thus clearly meets the definition of a firearm sufficient to support the enhancement. … Petitioner thus cannot establish that his counsel was ineffective in failing to consult with him further or file a notice of appeal on his behalf.

FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION v. LOANCARE, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 20, 2023

Because Rule 702 “clearly contemplates some degree of regulation of the subjects and theories” to which an expert may testify, the Supreme Court has stated: [I]n order to qualify as “scientific knowledge,” an inference … First, the witness must be qualified to testify as an expert, which requires “that the witness possess specialized expertise.” Id.

CIESLAK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 22, 2025

the ALJ found that Plaintiff suffered from several severe impairments: (1) acute disseminated encephalomyelitis (“ADEM”); (2) migrane headache disorder; (3) disorders of autonomic nervous system; (4) immune … Despite the ALJ finding Plaintiff had severe impairments, she determined at step three that Plaintiff “did not have an impairment or combination of impairments” that qualified under the Administration’s listed impairments

FANTINI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 19, 2025

The Court will consider, and cite to, Plaintiff’s RSOMF where it sets forth a proper response that clearly and directly addresses the facts set forth in Defendants’ SOMF. … terminated; and (4) the employer subsequently sought similarly qualified individuals for that job. Id. (quotations omitted).

HUNTER v. DEPTFORD BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2019

Whether Plaintiff Has Established A Prima Facie Case To establish a prima facie case under Title VII for discrimination, Plaintiff … Whether Plaintiff Has Established Pretext Assuming for the sake of argument that Plaintiff has established his prima facie case, Defendants argue that Plaintiff failed to

JOHN DOE-1 v. LEXISNEXIS RISK SOLUTIONS, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 7, 2025

Traditional tangible harms, such as monetary loss or physical injury, “readily qualify as concrete injuries under Article III.” TransUnion, 594 U.S. at 425. … Here Doe-1 and Doe-2 have not clearly pleaded that the absence of information required to be furnished under the FCRA caused them any harm.

EEOC v. State of NJ

620 F. Supp. 977 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 7, 1985

The actual prevalence of disease is clearly much higher than the numbers of healthy persons who will experience cardiac difficulty in each age group at the end of the relevant six-year period. … Plaintiff initially posited several difficulties which will face those sworn members who will be mandatorily retired, but the evidence has clearly established that certain of those difficulties are more imagined than real

BRATHWAITE v. CITY OF LONG BRANCH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 21, 2023

“As such, any attempt to amend the Complaint at this juncture must fail because Plaintiff cannot establish due diligence and good cause for seeking the amendment.” (/d.) … immunity.”

Saliba Investment LLC d/b/a J&S Mitsubishi v. Mitsubishi Motors North America, Inc.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 7, 2026

“The requirements of equitable estoppel are quite exacting” and the doctrine is applied “only in very compelling circumstances . . . where the interests of justice, morality and common fairness clearly dictate that course … After the presumption has been established, “the court assumes irreparable harm, even if the [party who has shown a likelihood of success on the merits] has proffered nothing in support.”

ABDUL-AZIZ v. HICKS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 22, 2023

It also dismissed the RA claims asserted against Defendants Hicks in his official capacity for monetary damages on state immunity grounds. … Defendants do not expressly oppose such proposed amendment based on futility, and based on the current record, the Court cannot assess whether such proposed amendment is clearly futile.10 Moreover, to the extent Plaintiff

HURLEY v. RIVERVIEW MEDICAL CENTER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 2023

. 18 First, Plaintiff argues that Defendants offer no evidence that Plaintiff falsified her time records, and as such, Defendants’ stated reason for terminating Plaintiff is clearly … To succeed in proving a failure-to-accommodate claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate that she: (1) qualifies as an individual with a disability, or... is perceived as having a disability, as that

MITE v. BRAY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 28, 2024

motion, the Court will not consider Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. 2) In a September 2019 mortgage billing statement sent to Plaintiff, Nationstar stated that Plaintiff could mail to a Dallas, Texas address a “Qualified … Plaintiff does not clearly dispute that he failed to properly serve Defendants within 90 days of filing his complaint.

Telco Communications, Inc. v. Barry

731 F. Supp. 670 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 5, 1990

Citizens for a Better Environment, 444 U.S. 620, 632 , 100 S.Ct. 826, 833-34 , 63 L.Ed.2d 73 (1980), the Court noted that *677 Prior authorities, therefore, clearly establish that charitable appeals for funds, on the street … 20.11(a)(6) (requiring disclosure of the percentage of the purchase price that may be deducted as a charitable contribution) are analogous to examples cited in Riley as unconstitutionally compelled disclosures: We would not immunize

DAY TO DAY IMPORTS, INC. v. FH GROUP INTERNATIONAL, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 2, 2019

“To establish a claim of copyright infringement, a plaintiff must establish: (1) ownership of a valid copyright; and (2) unauthorized copying of original elements of the plaintiffs work.” Kay Berry, Inc. v. … Thus, Plaintiff plausibly established the first element of its trademark infringement claim.

LAURANCE v. DAVIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 25, 2022

Clearly established federal law requires the invocation of the Miranda right to an attorney to be unambiguous. Davis v. United States, 512 U.S. 452, 459 (1994). … The Court cannot say this decision was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law as determined by the Supreme Court.

DaBronzo v. Roche Vitamins, Inc.

232 F. Supp. 2d 306 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 17, 2002

This principle is clearly illustrated by Barratt. In the case at bar, plaintiff is alleging collusion between Perimeter and RVI. … Clearly, the removal of asbestos requires a specialized skill which was not possessed by RVI employees, and thus caused RVI to seek Perimeter’s and plaintiffs services. (Factor 3).

WOODINGTON v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 8, 2021

time if the decision “was 8 Good cause will be found if there is “new and material evidence furnished[,]” a “clerical error was made[,]” or “[t]he evidence that was considered in making the determination or decision clearly … as evidence establishing that Plaintiff timely exhausted his administrative remedies.

CARROW v. FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 26, 2019

No. 33), the Court noted that the NJWPL “does not require an entity to render payment directly to a person to qualify as an employer.” Carrow v. … As such, New Jersey law clearly does not require an individualized inquiry under prong C in every case.

UNITED RENTALS (NORTH AMERICA), INC. v. LIBERTY MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY

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

Once the moving party has satisfied its initial burden, the party opposing the motion must establish that a genuine issue as to a material fact exists. Jersey Cent. … When requested, customer shall supply to United proof of such insurance by Certificate of Insurance clearly setting forth the coverage for the Equipment and naming United as loss payee and additional insured

NEEDHAM v. THE CHUBB CORPORATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 12, 2022

The decision of the administrator “will be overturned only if it is ‘clearly not supported by the evidence in the record or the administrator has failed to comply with the procedures required by the plan.’” … ERISA does not require employers to establish employee benefits plans. Lockheed Corp. v. Spink, 517 U.S. 882, 887 (1996).