Case law

SPENCE-PARKER v. Delaware River and Bay Authority

656 F. Supp. 2d 488 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 21, 2009

187 , 707 A.2d 1000 (1998), and that the requirement that the mandate of public policy be “clear” cannot be overlooked: A basic requirement of the wrongful discharge cause of action is that the mandate of public policy be clearly … To state a claim for wrongful termination (including a claim of constructive discharge) under the NJLAD, a plaintiff must allege “that he or she: (1) belongs to a protected class, (2) was qualified for the position held,

MOUSSA

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 24, 2026

Bipolar and Related Disorders), and 12.06 (Anxiety and Obsessive-Compulsive Disorders); and generally equate to Section 1.00 (Musculoskeletal Disorders), 3.00 (Respiratory Disorders), 8.00 (Skin Disorders), and 14.00 (Immune … If a claimant believes an error was made, he or she “must clearly identify the error and explain how the error actually ‘affect[ed] [his or her] “substantial rights.”’”

CHAPMAN v. INSPIRA HEALTH NETWORK, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 25, 2020

Defendants do not contest that Plaintiff belongs to a protected class, is qualified for her position, or that she suffered an adverse employment action. … The Court finds that Plaintiff has met her burden in establishing a prima facie case of discrimination.

Cleanox Environmental Services, Inc. v. Hudson Environmental Services, Inc.

14 F. Supp. 2d 601 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 27, 1998

The Defendants assert the pressure limitation is applicable to all of the claims, including Claim One of the 141 Patent, because the Specification does not qualify or restrict the limitation in any way. See id. at 19. … The Specification also clearly supports the reading that Claim One of the ’483 Patent is intended to be sequential.

ROGERS v. NJDOC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 19, 2021

. § 1915(a), dismissed certain claims pursuant to § 1915(e)(2)(B), based on immunity and failure to state a claim, and permitted the remaining claims to proceed. … Title II of the ADA, 42 U.S.C. § 12132 provides: “no qualified individual with a disability shall, by reason of such disability, be excluded from participation in or be denied the benefits of the services

PALMERI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 11, 2026

For that reason, Plaintiff fails to plausibly establish intentional discrimination based on sex. … The enforceability of an arbitration agreement depends on whether it “clearly” and “unambiguously” puts the parties on notice of their rights and their “intent to surrender those rights.” Noren v.

APPLEBAUM v. FABIAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 9, 2021

As established below, six of those acts clearly occurred before June 25, 2014, and Plaintiff was necessarily aware of them at the time they occurred. … The publication of these statements is clearly well outside the one-year statute of limitations.

THERABODY, INC. v. DIALECTIC DISTRIBUTION LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 10, 2024

The Amended Complaint also clearly alleges that Defendant sold the Products that bear these marks. Id. ¶¶ 16, 87-90, 92, 95- 96, 98, 100, 103. … These alleged promotional efforts and resulting recognition, if proven, establish the Trademarks as “famous.”

Rite Aid Corp. v. Bd. of Pharmacy of State of NJ

421 F. Supp. 1161 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 14, 1976

The State may employ qualified pharmacists to sit as members of the Board of Pharmacy full-time, provided that they not practice during their term of office. … This record does not establish intentional or purposeful discrimination any more than it establishes a substantial pecuniary interest on the part of Board members which would require disqualification. [24] The district court

MAGNANI v. MADDALUNA

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 17, 2020

Those statements are insufficient to establish a promise of renewal. … Those allegations fail to establish a prima facie case of fraud.

HILSENRATH v. SCHOOL DISTRICT OF THE CHATHAMS

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

While clearly rejecting the Lemon test, the majority in Kennedy was less clear about what would replace it—i.e., what would constitute a proper “historical analysis” of a party’s Establishment Clause claim in all cases … evidence of coercion is lacking. 16 The analysis here is hampered somewhat by the Kennedy Court’s having found it unnecessary to define “what exactly qualifies

Ameritas Life Insurance Corp. v. Wilmington Savings Fund Society, FSB, as Securities Intermediary

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 2026

Although the Trust was established and fully funded by the Kolel, the Trust Agreement contains no mention of the Kolel. Babad Aff. $11. … was the undisputed intended beneficiary yet clearly failed to salisfy the statutory requirements of an insurable interest under N.J.S.A. § 17B:24- 1(a)(5).

Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical, Inc. v. Kali Laboratories, Inc.

482 F. Supp. 2d 478 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 5, 2007

Example 23 clearly describes a composition in the form of an orally administered tablet. … Here, the Court finds that a reasonable expectation of success has been established.

SINES v. DARLING INGREDIENTS INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 6, 2023

Even at a general level, Lamicella is not qualified to apply the methodology or analysis that he previews. … Although Cal is qualified, his methodology is unreliable and his analysis does not fit the case. i.

B.L. v. FETHERMAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 18, 2023

District of Columbia, subjects, or causes to be subjected, any citizen of the United States or other person within the jurisdiction thereof to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities … Plaintiff does not plead any facts establishing the existence of similarly situated individuals.

HAIG

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 22, 2026

¶ 15, are clearly communications made in judicial or quasi-judicial proceedings by Amtrak’s lawyer and investigators—who are “participants authorized by law.” … The NJCRA creates a private right of action for “Any person who has been deprived of any substantive due process or equal protection rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of the United States

REPUBLIC OF TURKEY v. CICEK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 17, 2020

To establish the ICSID Tribunal’s jurisdiction, Cascade must show “(1) that it is a good faith ‘investor’ from the Belgo-Luxembourg Economic Union that made an investment in Turkey that qualifies for protection under the … Thus, arbitral tribunals, such as the ICSID Tribunal, qualify as a foreign tribunal under section 1782.

NEW JERSEY BUILDING LABORERS' STATEWIDE BENEFIT FUNDS AND THE TRUSTEES THEREOF v. DEMZA MASONRY LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 3, 2019

Moreover, many of the same, or very similar, factors that were not clearly established with respect to the alter ego analysis also preclude summary judgment in this context (see supra at 9-10). … In applying this test, it cannot be disputed that Speranza Inc. and Demza qualify as ““trade[s] or businesses,” as defined by the IRS.

SYMETRA LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY v. JJK 2016 INSURANCE TRUST

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 28, 2021

The Trust was established on August 4, 2016 by and between Joseph J. Krivulka (“‘Krivulka”) as grantor and Lerner as trustee for the purposes of Krivulka’s estate planning. (/d. … Oct. 10, 2017) (“The Court finds that [the third- party plaintiffs’] own allegations of their intent to resell the boats cannot qualify them as consumers under the NJCFA.”).

HUBBARD v. COMCAST CORPORATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 21, 2020

Thus, “to qualify as a question of arbitrability that the Court may consider, the challenge must ‘relat[e] to the making and performance of the agreement to arbitrate.’” Quilloin v. … The forms clearly identify the Program Guide as containing the terms of Comcast Solutions, and the Program Guide’s language is sufficiently clear and unambiguous to create a binding arbitration agreement. (Doc.