Case law

UNITED ASSOCIATION OF PLUMBERS & PIPEFITTERS LOCAL 322 OF SOUTHERN NEW JERSEY v. MALLINCKRODT ARD, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 18, 2020

Needle, 560 U.S. at 195 n.4 (holding that the Copperweld functional test should be used to determine if an agency relationship is “genuine” and therefore immune from antitrust scrutiny). … Express Scripts’ failure to address this clearly relevant Third Circuit precedent is troubling.

NAYEE v. D'ILIO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 23, 2021

The Appellate Division’s denial of this claim was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law. … The Appellate Division’s denial of this claim was not an unreasonable application of clearly established federal law.

METROPOLITAN NEUROSURGERY ASSOCIATES v. AETNA INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2024

that the subject emergency spine surgery performed on Patient by Out-of-Network provider MNA “met the definition of ‘Emergency’ or ‘Emergency Medical Condition as defined in the Summary Plan Description (“SPD”) and thus qualifies … Specifically, Defendants maintain that the letter dated January 30, 2020, that Plaintiff sent via email “is clearly not a first-level administrative appeal submitted to ALIC at ALIC’s designated address, as the Plan requires

MCLAREN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 20, 2025

Law-of-the-case doctrine aside, Plaintiffs argue that Defendants violated a clearly established legal right of consumers by overcharging for notary fees in violation of N.J. Stat. Ann. § 22A:4-14. … And that writing must contain “[a] provision that violates any clearly established legal right of a consumer or responsibility of a seller.” N.J. Stat.

NORTHERN HIGHLANDS REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION v. C.E.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 12, 2019

This was established during Mr. E’s deposition and the exhibits shown to him during that deposition.” (ECF No. 52-1 at 22). … ALJ McGill concluded that this second sentence qualified the first in limiting the subject matter of the May IEP meeting.

Rose Art Industries, Inc. v. Raymond Geddes & Co.

31 F. Supp. 2d 367 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 20, 1998

[The plaintiff] must establish the existence of a recognizable trade dress ... [and] that its ... packages have a consistent overall look.” Walt Disney Co. v. … Rose Art asserts that Geddes clearly copied this legend from Rose Art’s consumer legend which states "Rose Art invites your comments and questions about this product.

HO-HO-KUS, INC. v. SUCHARSKI

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 9, 2023

These allegations clearly plead that Mr. Sucharski had access to HHK’s trade secrets. … These cases show that the legislature only wished to pre-empt state law that clearly conflicted with the terms of the statute.

Gould-National Batteries, Inc. v. Gulton Industries, Inc.

231 F. Supp. 609 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 8, 1964

A layman is prone to think that all problems which may be submitted to scientific analysis are capable of being answered clearly, definitely and certainly. This is not the case. … Thus, two equilibriums are reached at the same time to establish total equilibrium in the cell.

THE ESTATE OF ULISSES M. RODRIGUEZ v. JOHNSON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 29, 2020

Plaintiffs argue in opposition that “[w]hether the Medical Defendants qualify as a state entity for purposes of Section 1983 turns on whether Defendants are ‘persons’ within the meaning of the statute.” … make any Eleventh Amendment immunity or § 1983 “personhood” arguments, but rather only that the three named entities are not properly named separate parties because they are all part of Rutgers.

AURINIA PHARMACEUTICALS INC. v. SUN PHARMACEUTICAL INDUSTRIES, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 2, 2022

As such, good cause has not been established. … The futility analysis requires to the Court to evaluate whether a claim is clearly futile on its face.

SANTIAGO HERNANDEZ v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 2, 2020

The Social Security Act and the Five-Step Process To qualify for SSI, a claimant must meet income and resource limitations, and show that “he is unable to engage in any substantial gainful … The court in Johnson clearly stated that a physical limitation that prevents an individual from working is a disability within the meaning of the Social Security Act.

Toolasprashad v. Grondolsky

570 F. Supp. 2d 610 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 23, 2008

Schwartz’[] report was completely ignored [even though that report] clearly contradicted the [unfavorable medical opinions in the BOP] report.... … In contrast, the petitioner’s mere impressions or the mere appearance of bias does not establish bias. See id.; see also Withrow v. Larkin, 421 U.S. at 47 , 95 S.Ct. 1456 .

PAVLYIK v. NOGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 24, 2023

TRIAL, (7) THE NEED FOR INSTRUCTION AS TO LESSER- INCLUDED OFFENSES TO POSSESSION OF A DESTRUCTIVE DEVICE, IN VIOLATION OF N.J.S.A. 2C:39- 3(A), WAS CLEARLY … Hassler was a fact witness, never qualified or offered as an expert witness.

JACOBSON v. CHARM CITY AVIATION, LLC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 2, 2025

Plaintiff also asserts that Belo clearly had the authority to terminate him because during the course of Plaintiff’s employment, Plaintiff and Belo had several conversations, during which Belo mentioned her decisions to … The principal contention is whether the Complaint sufficiently alleges that Belo supervised Plaintiff to qualify as an “employer” within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 34:19-2(a).

Alexander v. Primerica Holdings, Inc.

819 F. Supp. 1296 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 25, 1993

Beginning in 1957, American Can maintained the Plan which is a retirement welfare benefits plan for qualified salaried employees who retired. Id., ¶21 . … This court is not a policy court and is bound to follow' — not extend or alter — the established law of this Circuit.

In Re Milestone Scientific Securities Litigation

103 F. Supp. 2d 425 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2000

It is clearly stated that the Wand is a delivery system. 2. … The First Circuit, however, determined that the “complaint clearly [fell] short” [in establishing the requisite state of mind]. See id. at 204.

SMITH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 27, 2022

She argues that her need for a caretaker clearly shows that she is unable to work independently on a sustained basis. (Id.) … Nevertheless, the evidence noted by the ALJ clearly addressed both factors.

MALL CHEVROLET, INC. v. GENERAL MOTORS LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 8, 2021

argued that a franchisor cannot establish good cause if it did not act in good faith. … However, the Third Circuit has clearly foreclosed that argument.

JORJANI v. NEW JERSEY INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 2, 2022

As to the Rule 5.3(c) factors, a privilege log that does not reveal the substance of privileged communication does not generally qualify for sealing. See Novo Nordisk v. Sanofi-Aventis, 2008 WL 323611, at *2 (D.N.J. … The Court finds that Defendants have not provided any specific support in favor of confidentiality, and thus have not established good cause to maintain their confidential designation.

KIM v. KOREAN AIR LINES

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 14, 2021

I acknowledge that Judge Simandle has held that registration qualifies as consent to be sued in New Jersey, thus conferring general jurisdiction. Otsuka Pharm. Co. v. Mylan Inc., 106 F. … At the outset, the Delta website does not qualify as a sufficient contact with New Jersey.