Case law

RODWELL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 6, 2026

Thus, to the extent Plaintiffs are seeking discovery to support a dismissed claim, the deposition of Mayor Baraka is clearly not appropriate. … See Stevenson, 2024 WL 1526102, at *2 (Mayor Baraka qualifies as a high-level government official for purposes of Morgan doctrine); Buono, 249 F.R.D. at 472 n.2 (Mayor of Newark is a high-level government official for Morgan

MARTIN v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 30, 2025

They argue, however, that “[c]aselaw establishes that this kind of limitation on showering [is] insufficient to support a retaliation claim.” (Moving Br. at 8, 10, 11.) … immunity.

Rosen v. Public Service Electric and Gas Company

328 F. Supp. 454 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 24, 1971

Guidelines in this area, issued by the Commission, in 1968, after the filing of these actions, clearly barred differences in optional or compulsory retirement ages based on sex. … The word “sex” was adopted by a vote of 168 to 133 and attempts to qualify the clear word “sex” by amendments were rebuffed. •id. at 678.

Port Authority of New York & New Jersey v. Affiliated FM Insurance

245 F. Supp. 2d 563 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 17, 2001

Hence, the effective language of Rule 702 reads: If scientific, technical, or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an … The Heller decision is clearly applicable controlling law on this motion.

Federal Deposit Insurance v. National Union Fire Insurance

146 F. Supp. 2d 541 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 18, 2001

Clearly, RTC v. … First Bank described, again in dicta, an improper financial benefit as “those cases which may arise where the employee improperly approved the loan to a person or entity he knew was not qualified for such loan” or “where

Emcore Corp. v. PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

102 F. Supp. 2d 237 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 6, 2000

Had Emcore named PWC solely as defendant, and defined the enterprise as PWC alone, dismissal would clearly be mandated. … Emcore has clearly identified two enterprises in its complaint. “[I]t is the function of discovery to fill in the details, and of trial to establish fully each element of the cause of action.”

United States v. Pretlow

779 F. Supp. 758 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 5, 1991

A review of the Constitution itself clearly supports this interpretation of Mistretta . … The statutory mitigating factors set forth in section 848(m) are clearly not intended to be exhaustive.

Federal Insurance Ex Rel. Associated Aviation Underwriters v. Purex Industries, Inc.

972 F. Supp. 872 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 27, 1997

Since there are clearly disputed issues in this ease-which impact the determination of whether Purex gave notice to the insurers within a reasonable time, the court finds that the insurers have failed to establish as a matter … The soil and tanks were clearly “owned property.” (emphasis added).

PLATKIN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 18, 2026

Finally, while a party’s assertion of the First Amendment privilege is qualified and can be overcome if “the information sought is highly relevant,” Perry, 591 F.3d at 1141, the Court is not aware of any authority supporting … Litig., 641 F.3d at 491-92 (“[W]e cannot say that the district court clearly and egregiously erred in concluding that [a witness]’s single, [unsworn] statement was insufficient.

LEVYASH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 4, 2020

Under the EAJA, the United States waived its sovereign and general statutory immunities to fee awards and created “a limited exception to the ‘American Rule’ against awarding attorney fees to prevailing parties.” … Appx. 430, 433 (3d Cir. 2010) (“The clearly established case law . . . required the ALJ to develop the record sufficient to permit meaningful appellate review. . . .

Brown v. Fairleigh Dickinson University

560 F. Supp. 391 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 15, 1983

Defendants were clearly the “prevailing parties” on all claims in this action. … Second, and more important, the Third Circuit has clearly rejected mechanical approaches such as this. In Hughes v.

GAMBRELL v. SOUTH BRUNSWICK BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 16, 2019

Plaintiffs’ Amended Complaint is not clearly stated. … based on their race or religion under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., OF the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (“NJLAD”), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq., Plaintiffs are required to establish

E.E. v. RIDGEFIELD PARK BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 11, 2020

For both the Section 504 and ADA claims, Plaintiffs must establish that K.M. “(1) has a disability; (2) was otherwise qualified to participate in a school program; and (3) was denied the benefits of the program or was otherwise … A plaintiff can establish the third element by demonstrating that he “was not given meaningful access to a program.” Id.

Webster v. Dollar General, Inc.

197 F. Supp. 3d 692 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 14, 2016

In other words, Plaintiff clearly recites the out-of-court statement of Ms. … Rather, Plaintiff points, more nebulously, to his unilateral completion of an employment application, but no actual evidence to establish the arguable formation of a valid contract.

Delaware Riverkeeper Network v. Soil Safe, Inc.

223 F. Supp. 3d 231 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 30, 2016

Br. 23, which would appear to clearly refute DRN’s own position that it is the result of a spill. … DRN does not contend that the County Park Site RAWP does not qualify for Section 1.5(c)(2) treatment, at least generally.

GRIGGS v. DAVIS

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

Federal law is “clearly established” for these purposes if it is clearly expressed in “the holdings, as opposed to the dicta” of the United States Supreme Court. See Woods v. Donald, 575 U.S. 312, 316 (2015). … Accordingly, Griggs has not established that the state court’s rejection of Griggs’s ineffective assistance claim is contrary to or an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law, and he is not

RIYA DEV CORPORATION v. AMGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY

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

“In order to qualify under the ‘otherwise been made known’ language, the ‘alleged disclosure must be clear and unambiguous.’” Cap. Health Sys., Inc. v. Veznedaroglu, No. 15-8288, 2020 WL 13551439, at *3 (D.N.J. … these witnesses in their own Rule 26 disclosures or in their pretrial order witness list and held that any alleged failure by the plaintiff could “hardly have caused ‘surprise’ to [d]efendants,” as the defendants “were clearly

TOWNSEND JR. v. COUNTY OF MERCER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 29, 2024

A prima facie case of employment discrimination requires Townsend to show that he (1) belongs to a protected class; (2) was qualified for the position; (3) was subject to an adverse employment action despite being qualified … Although Townsend “need not establish that precise kind of disparate treatment to establish a claim of discrimination, he must establish some causal nexus between his membership in a protected class and” his termination

THE ESTATE OF JON LEON WATSON v. CUMBERLAND COUNTY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 9, 2020

“Only a qualified mental health professional may remove an inmate from suicide watch at the jail.” Id. … Watson, and (2) Defendants have Qualified Immunity. [Dkt. No. 126].

Christian Feigenspan, Inc. v. Bodine

264 F. 186 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 9, 1920

At the outset let us keep clearly in mind that the issue here relates solely to power — the power to amend the United States Constitution. … legally prevented by any power other than their own from establishing slavery and giving it the protection of their laws.