Case law

FOSTER v. KENNEDY UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL, INC.

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

Under McDonnell Douglas, a plaintiff must first establish a prima facie case of discrimination. … Ass’n, 503 F.3d 217, 232 (3d Cir. 2007) (noting the plaintiff “clearly suffered a materially adverse action, since she was terminated from her job”); see also Betts, 687 F.

DESIRE v. DREAMWEAR INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 10, 2022

P. 5.3(c) (requiring among other things a single consolidated motion clearly explaining the injury that would result if the materials were not sealed). … “To state a claim for discrimination under the NJLAD, a plaintiff must first establish that: (1) she is a member of a protected class; (2) she was qualified for the position in question

Kalow & Springut, LLP v. Commence Corp.

272 F.R.D. 397 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 28, 2011

Furthermore, Plaintiffs attorneys, from the law firms of Cohn, Lifland, Pearlman, Herrmann & Knopf, LLP and Miller Law LLC, are qualified to represent the proposed class in this case. … Plaintiff claims that these damages are also readily established by a reasonable estimate.

SILBERSHER v. JANSSEN BIOTECH INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 17, 2021

the same allegations or transactions” of fraud were publicly disclosed through qualifying sources, if any. … Moreover, BTG’s role in developing and licensing Zytiga is not clearly related to the substance of Plaintiff’s allegations.

Reitmeier v. Kalinoski

631 F. Supp. 565 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 2, 1986

But here plaintiff is single and thus would not qualify for the homestead exemption even in those states with such legislation. … Clearly, there is no such express agreement here. 11 .

Wofac Corporation v. United States

269 F. Supp. 654 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 1, 1967

Goodwin transferred a-nominal part of his shares to qualify his wife. … Section 381 pertains to certain tax-free reorganizations between corporate entities; Section 382, on the other hand, establishes two limitations in the conjunctive for the utilization of a net operating loss of a transferee

In Re Cendant Corporation Prides Litigation

157 F. Supp. 2d 376 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 24, 2001

She states that she called various Chase officers to determine what records would qualify and eventually determined that the “TN2 754: Security Holders Report” would suffice. See id. at ¶ 10-11. … Collins had allegedly been told that the two claims were in order when she sent in the August 12 fax, because clearly Mr.

McNeilab, Inc. v. North River Insurance

645 F. Supp. 525 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 31, 1986

Certainly, the policy behind the sistership provision — to avoid ambiguity and qualify the breadth of coverage — would be violated if recovery were allowed here. … Clearly, the insured’s intent was important.

United States v. Bertoli

854 F. Supp. 975 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 30, 1994

It’s clearly relevant to an issue other than Mr. Bertoli’s character. It is clearly classified as a similar wrong. … That employee, however, did not lie to the grand jury but entered into an immunity agreement with the Government. Id.

Midway Mfg. Co. v. Bandai-America, Inc.

546 F. Supp. 125 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 22, 1982

“Galaxian” is clearly a distinctive mark as it is an arbitrary or fanciful name not descriptive of the product. … It is the user of the arcade machines to whom Bandai is clearly attempting to sell its Galaxian. Defendants’ brief at p. 20.

GAGE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 15, 2026

In the first action, Ruschke moved to dismiss the complaint based on a qualified immunity defense pursuant to Rule 12(b)(6), which was subsequently granted by the Honorable Michael A. Shipp, U.S.D.J. … However, “the burden of establishing the need for transfer . . . rests with the movant.” Jumara v. State Farm Ins., 55 F.3d 873, 879 (3d Cir. 1995).

Davis v. Onebeacon Insurance Group

721 F. Supp. 2d 329 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 2010

Such a procedural posture does not qualify as a “direct action” under 28 U.S.C. § 1332 (c)(1). See Travelers Indem. Co. v. … In response to PA General’s motion, Davis contends that as an insurer, PA General cannot rely upon an employer’s immunity from tort liability under the Act.

NELSON v. BERGAMI

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

This document thus does not establish that the firearm was made in New Jersey,1 only that it was shipped to a dealer in this state in April 1986. (Id.) … Petitioner’s claims, however, are undercut by the very documents he submitted which indicate that New Jersey itself clearly identified his 2008 and 2014 crimes of conviction as felonies.

Poole v. Stephens

688 F. Supp. 149 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 16, 1988

Recruits practice and then attempt to qualify in proficiency with sidearm, rifle and shotgun. Approximately 50% of the recruits are using firearms for the first time. … the individual’s positive confirmed test results will be reported to the County Prosecutor or the Division of Criminal Justice. *162 ATTACHMENT B DRUG SCREENING MEDICATION INFORMATION In order to ensure the accuracy of established

Wausau Underwriters Insurance v. State Automobile Mutual Insurance

557 F. Supp. 2d 502 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 6, 2008

Rather, Plaintiffs’ injuries were caused by an event so unexpected, unde-signed and fortuitous as to qualify as accidental within the terms of the policy. Id. at 293 . … Not surprisingly, Wausau argues that this case is clearly a case of faulty workmanship as in Kvaerner , and it is well-settled that claims for faulty workmanship are not claims resulting from an “accident.”

Church & Dwight Co. v. S.C. Johnson & Son, Inc.

873 F. Supp. 893 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 23, 1994

“The Screener Questionnaire [merely] established that the survey respondent qualified” for the interview. Id. … Irreparable Injury Although plaintiff Church & Dwight has proven success on the merits, it must also establish that it has suffered irreparable injury.

DEWULF v. BLATT BILLIARD CORP.

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 2, 2023

“A court should grant a motion to strike a defense only where the ‘insufficiency of the defense is clearly apparent.’” … On a motion like this one, it must appear clearly from the face of the pleadings that the claim is untimely.

NEW JERSEY COALITION OF AUTOMOTIVE RETAILERS, INC. v. MAZDA MOTOR OF AMERICA, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 30, 2019

In Kessler, the plaintiff “clearly lacked standing” as it did not allege any concrete harm to any of its members, but only “an ideological interest” in the litigation. Id. … NJ CAR argues Mazda “concedes that five Mazda dealer-members of NJ CAR do not qualify for any of the facilities portion of the MBEP, that eight do not fully qualify, so that eleven in total will certainly get loss of the

United States v. Christie

570 F. Supp. 2d 657 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 13, 2008

But none of the Government conduct that Christie suggests qualifies as outrageous conduct even comes close to the activities of law enforcement in the cases cited by Christie. … Christie is wrong to conclude that the affiant in this case does not qualify as an expert in child pornography investigations.

GABERY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 9, 2026

The ALJ clearly implicitly adopted Dr. Gardner’s opinion of moderate limitations and articulated the findings that supported that finding. R. 18–19. … “While ‘the ALJ must accurately convey to the vocational expert all of a claimant’s credibly established limitations,’ . . .