Case law

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.

LM Ex Rel. HM v. Evesham Tp. Bd. of Educ.

256 F. Supp. 2d 290 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2003

This language serves to qualify the nonpublic school referenced in the prior clause, making clear that any private school placement suggested by the child study team must be nonsectarian in nature. … Using the framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court in Lemon v.

DELAWARE VALLEY PLUMBING SUPPLY, INC. v. MERCHANTS MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 16, 2021

Dec. 14, 2020) (coverage barred because “the Policy clearly excludes coverage for damage, loss or expense arising from a virus. … Plaintiff’s own Complaint, and the documents on which it relies, affirmatively establishes the fact that the coronavirus is a “virus, bacterium or other microorganism that induces or is

HP HOLDING LLC v. RED ROOF INNS, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2025

Defendants’ argument belies the Court’s analysis in its prior opinion and, on the merits, does not establish futility. First, the Court in its prior opinion thoroughly analyzed the NJFPA claim for futility. … Defendants’ contention that the Court never considered the timeliness of the NJFPA claim contradicts the 4 Defendants ask the Court to reconsider whether both plaintiffs qualify as “franchisees” under the NJFPA.

MOLNAR

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 10, 2025

ESTABLISHING ELIGIBILITY FOR DISABILITY INSURANCE BENEFITS AND SUPPLEMENTAL SECURITY INCOME A claimant may establish disability under the Social Security Act by proving they are unable to “engage in any … Judge Levin clearly wove consideration of supportability into his overall analysis of the PAMFs.

TEDFORD

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 19, 2026

(FAC ¶ 96.) 4 “A La Carte” services include: Loan processing; Brokerage services/account maintenance (if offered by the plan); Distribution services; and Processing of qualified domestic relations orders … Danza clearly held that the defendant, Fidelity, a recordkeeping servicer, was not a party in interest at the time the recordkeeping contract was formed.

VILLARREAL v. UNITED AIRLINES, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2021

To establish a prima facie case of discrimination under Title VII, Plaintiff must allege: “(1) that [she] is a member of a protected class; (2) that [she] was qualified for the position she held; (3) that [she] suffered … As such, Plaintiff’s claim qualifies as a minor dispute subject to preemption.

Ricoh Co., Ltd. v. Honeywell, Inc.

817 F. Supp. 473 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 16, 1993

Similarly, in Sony, 16 U.S.P.Q.2d at 1447, the court rejected the argument by a Japanese plaintiff in a patent infringement case that its American subsidiary qualified as its "home turf." Id. … Ricoh further argues that "this is ‘clearly a case in which the alternative forum is so distant or unfriendly that transfer will have an unfair impact on Plaintiff.' ” Opp.

MARASEK v. 206 COURTHOUSE LANE LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2019

App’x 239, 243 (3d Cir. 2014)), ADA Title I “To successfully state a claim under Title II of the ADA, a person ‘must demonstrate: (1) he is a qualified individual; (2) with a disability … Defendants clearly fall within the ADA’s definition of “public entity” and therefore are not subject to Title II.

KUHL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

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

system (Felty’s syndrome (hypersplenism with compromised immune competence)). … However, the ALJ need include only “credibly established” limitations. Rutherford, 399 F.3d at 554; see also Zirnsak v.

Kuzian v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.

937 F. Supp. 2d 599 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 28, 2013

Plaintiffs clearly have standing to bring claims for the refrigerator models they purchased. … Electrolux also argues that its advertising “puffery,” such as “ice at your fingertips,” cannot qualify as material misrepresentations.

JONES v. NJ DOC CENTRAL TRANSPORTATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 19, 2024

Nwachukwu was clearly taking steps towards scheduling Plaintiff's surgery. Plaintiff next argues that Nwachukwu took too long to obtain the cardiac clearance. … Additionally, Plaintiff concedes that Defendant NJDOC is entitled to Eleventh Amendment immunity as to his state law negligence claim raised in federal court. (See id.)

CHIPEGO v. ALLERGAN INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 14, 2022

Plaintiffs allege the BIOCELL implants cause Breast-Implant Associated Anaplastic Large Cell Lymphoma (“BIA-ALCL”), a cancer of the immune system that develops in the area around an implant, often between the implant and … Jim’s Concrete of Brevard, Inc., 538 U.S. 691, 698 (2003) (“[W]henever the subject matter of an action qualifies it for removal, the burden is on a plaintiff to find an express exception.”).

PATTANAYAK v. MASTERCARD, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 12, 2021

If the district court does not hold an evidentiary hearing, “the plaintiff need only establish a prima facie case of personal jurisdiction.” O'Connor v. … As Pattanayak points out, two cases, Otsuka and Bane, would suggest that registration qualifies as consent to be sued in New Jersey. (Pl. Brf. at 10-11 (citing Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Mylan Inc., 106 F.

Magnin v. Beeler

110 F. Supp. 2d 338 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 25, 2000

To provide an incentive for prisoners to participate in such substance abuse programs, Congress conferred upon the BOP discretion to grant qualifying participants a sentence reduction of up to one year. … Acknowledging that “congress expected the BOP to make early-release determinations ‘based on criteria to be established and uniformly applied ...,’” H.R.Rep.

United States v. Bissell

954 F. Supp. 903 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 29, 1997

These charges were clearly distinct; there is no reference to Barbara Bissell in the Second Superseding Indictment concerning these charges. … Since then, the Government has taken the money she intended to pay for legal fees and she believes that she is qualified as indigent and asked me if she could make application for counsel under CJA.

EASTERDAY v. USPACK LOGISTICS LLC

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

The Defendant, the delivery company, argued that the plaintiff, as a “management employee” with no close contact with channels of interstate commerce could not qualify as an exempt worker under Section 1. Id. … Rather, Plaintiff’s sworn deposition establishes that he delivered goods across state lines.

Stella Omojola v. Arc of Ocean County, et al.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 14, 2025

Next, “acts of retaliation qualify as adverse employment actions if they ‘well might have dissuaded a reasonable worker from making or supporting a charge of discrimination.’” Remp v. Alcon Lab’ys, Inc., 701 F. … Plaintiff’s termination was clearly an adverse employment action, see Maddox v. City of Newark, 50 F. Supp. 3d 606, 623 (D.N.J. 2014), and defendants do not argue otherwise (Defs.’ Mot.

Ritter v. Clinton House Restaurant

64 F. Supp. 2d 374 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 27, 1999

We must analyze each of those contentions to determine whether plaintiff qualifies as a prevailing party. … This argument is clearly specious because Clinton House was not acquired by the present owners until October of 1995.