Case law

Yannicelli v. Nash

354 F. Supp. 143 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 24, 1973

Ill Under the rule of sovereign immunity, a suit against the United States is barred unless the United States specifically waives its immunity by statute and consents to be sued. Larson v. … Although the statute is only a grant of general jurisdiction, and not a waiver by the United States of its sovereign immunity, it does authorize proceedings in which the United States waives its immunity under some other

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

118 F. Supp. 3d 646 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 22, 2015

Lehigh Valley Hosp., Inc., 184 F.3d 268 , 275 n. 1 (3d Cir.1999) (noting that, “protecting a competitor’s ability to compete” clearly rests within “the interest of competition”). … Moreover, even if Torrent ultimately overcomes Noerr-Pennington immunity, in order to *658 succeed on its Counterclaim, Torrent must still establish a substantive antitrust violation. See Organon Inc. v.

Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel

720 F. Supp. 2d 587 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 22, 2010

Governmental Immunity Qualified immunity protects some government officials from some federal claims, and state common law and statutes protect some officials from some state claims. … A mistake is not reasonable when it amounts to the violation of a “clearly established” right, such that “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.”

United States v. A Parcel of Land

742 F. Supp. 189 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 13, 1990

The first criteria is clearly satisfied here. All of the significant issues involved in this case have been resolved as a matter of law. The issues are also controlling and some involve constitutional questions. … Although the question of whether testimony compelled under a grant of immunity may be used in civil forfeiture proceedings is also somewhat novel, I found that the government had established probable cause for the forfeiture

GOTTSHALL-WRIGHT v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 1, 2023

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, “government officials performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … “[U]nless the plaintiff's allegations state a claim of violation of clearly established law, a defendant pleading qualified immunity is entitled to dismissal before the commencement of discovery.” Oliver v.

STABILE v. CONKLIN

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

the violated constitutional right was clearly established in the specific context of the case. … Consequently, “qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.” Thomas v.

LOUIS v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 16, 2023

constitutional right is clearly established.” … While absolute immunity applies, the Court will also address qualified immunity.

Clarken v. United States

791 F. Supp. 1029 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 19, 1991

But clearly the occurrence of an emergency will not invoke the immunity, if it was the doctor’s duty to respond to the emergency.” Clayton v. Kelly, 183 Ga.App. 45, 47 , 357 S.E.2d 865 (1987). … The Ninth Circuit stated that such reliance upon Lee was misplaced because the Good Samaritan statute had been amended in Alaska, changing the qualifying actor from “a person who, without expecting compensation, renders care

WOODWARD v. TAMBINI

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

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity “shields officials from civil liability insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional … Defendants also asserted they are entitled to qualified immunity on this claim.

DAVIS v. BURKE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 29, 2023

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability for civil damages ‘insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person … right at issue was clearly established at the time of the alleged violation.

DALAL v. MOLINELLI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 30, 2021

, rather, is entitled to qualified immunity. … right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Asah v. N.J. Dep't of Educ.

330 F. Supp. 3d 975 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 27, 2018

that the Department was entitled to sovereign immunity. … State authority to regulate natural gas prices is well established.

D.O. ex rel C.O. v. Borden

804 F. Supp. 2d 210 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2011

Defendants also contend that Edward Borden is shielded from Plaintiffs' Section 1983 claims pursuant to the doctrine of qualified immunity. … Oct. 23, 2009) ("It is well-established that municipalities ... are immune from punitive damages under § 1983.” (citing City of Newport v.

Stolinski v. Pennypacker

772 F. Supp. 2d 626 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 16, 2011

This reasoning might be correct in the narrow context of whether an officer who lacked actual probable cause might nevertheless be protected by qualified immunity, because qualified immunity aims to protect officers acting … Because the Court finds that Defendants are entitled to summary judgment on all of Plaintiff's federal claims even without qualified immunity, it need not address whether qualified immunity would otherwise apply.

Bryant v. New Jersey Department of Transportation

1 F. Supp. 2d 426 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 18, 1998

Colorado River Abstention The State Defendants contend that abstention is warranted in this case under the doctrine established in Colorado River Water Conservation District v. … Each of the State Defendants bears the burden of establishing its entitlement to sovereign immunity as "an 'alter ego’ or ‘arm’ of a state for purposes of the Eleventh Amendment.” See Christy v.

PETERSON v. CITY OF JERSEY CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2025

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, a court must consider whether the plaintiff has alleged a violation of a constitutional right and whether that right “was clearly established at the time of the alleged misconduct … Defendants argue that Plaintiff has not established a prima facie violation of a clearly established right by Saheed because Plaintiff was “accident[ally] hit by the vehicle” and “there is no evidence showing that Saheed

KAPLON v. MORRIS TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 24, 2025

“An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243–44 (2009). … Because the evidence does not show that Defendants violated Plaintiff’s clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, qualified immunity defeats Plaintiff’s § 1983 and NJCRA claims. C.

ROUNDTREE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 26, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless (1) the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, make out … standard to the jury’s findings to resolve qualified immunity as a matter of law.

CORRADI v. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 28, 2020

Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the Fourth Amendment rights asserted by Plaintiff are not clearly established. … Leatherwood had shown a violation of his rights sufficient to satisfy the first qualified immunity prong, he would fail on the ‘clearly established’ prong.” Id. at 1121 (citing Pearson, 555 U.S. at 243–44).

PARISI v. WIGGINS

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2024

The DOH Defendants’ Arguments for Qualified Immunity The DOH Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known