Case law

LENCHITZ v. CENLAR FSB

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 11, 2024

If a loan servicer “receives a qualified written request [QWR] from the borrower . . . for information relating to the servicing” of a “federally related mortgage loan,” the loan servicer must “make appropriate corrections … But the monthly statement does not, on its face, clearly indicate that the “-$1,718.00” listed in the “other” column on the May 17, 2021 statement represents the suspended excess LTRAP funds.

FOULKE v. TOWNSHIP OF CHERRY HILL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 30, 2025

Here, Plaintiffs have clearly done so. The Township rescinded Plaintiffs’ Permits after neighbors complained about noise ordinance violations. … It clearly involves a jury question. [Pls.’ Opp’n at 18.] In any event, the allegations in the Complaint – which this Court must accept as true – suggest otherwise.

PATEL v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 23, 2023

"[D]efense counsel's conjectures to his client about sentencing are irrelevant where the written plea agreement and in-court guilty plea colloquy clearly establish the defendant's maximum potential exposure and … (b) If the defendant qualifies for a decrease under subsection (a), the offense level determined prior to the operation of subsection (a) is level 16 or greater, and upon motion of the government stating

PILION v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

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

During the interview she was able to communicate clearly and she was able to follow the topic of a conversation. Her social interaction skills were limited. … In this case, the evidence fails to establish the presence of the “paragraph C” criteria.

KONOPKA

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2026

This is consistent with the medical evidence in the record.8 “In order to qualify for benefits, a person must be disabled as defined by the Social Security Act and its accompanying regulations as of his date last insured … evidence was obviously “cherry-picked” because it was helpful while other important evidence was conveniently overlooked, nor does the [c]ourt find that consideration of all the evidence clearly

Michael Andriola, C.P.A. v. PKFOD Holdings, LLC et al.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 30, 2026

Plaintiff asserts that the Ferreira corporation did not qualify for the PPP loan, so he brought the issue to the attention of the Ferreira corporation’s management. (Id. ¶¶ 8-9.) … “[I]f a complaint does not set forth clearly that the claims are subject to an arbitration agreement, or if the plaintiff rebuts the motion to compel ‘with reliable evidence that is more than a naked assertion . . . that

Weikel v. Tower Semiconductor Ltd.

183 F.R.D. 377 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 20, 1998

Tower was established as a joint venture of DSSI and National Semiconductor in March of 1993. See Complaint 112(d). … In the instant matter, the logic of In re Ford Motor Co. is clearly applicable. Lead Plaintiffs argue false information was prepared and disseminated in New Jersey, and DSSI exercised control over Tower from New Jersey.

LAIBOW v. MENASHE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 8, 2020

Stubblebine, particularly with respect to his inability to communicate his health needs clearly and effectively. (DE 1 9 59-61 & 63-65). Gen. … It provides that “[a] person not qualifying to practice pursuant to the first paragraph of this rule shall nonetheless be permitted to appear and prosecute or defend an action in any court of this State if the person .

PATEL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 18, 2026

It is well-established, however, “the group pleading doctrine is no longer viable in private securities actions after the enactment of the PSLRA.” … The Third Circuit agreed the statement was misleading because the defendants had reimbursed a tenant for reimbursements that were neither verified nor qualified. See id.

K.W.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 25, 2026

These hours do not qualify as productive time, as they were not “‘useful and of a type ordinarily necessary’ to secure the final result obtained from the litigation.” Del. … Seeking $600 per hour under the IDEA’s fee-shifting provision, while simultaneously drawing $200 per hour from the client for the very same work, is clearly overreach.

HAHN v. THE REALREAL, INC.

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

The email raised only the possibility of arbitration, and the plaintiff responded clearly that she had no intention of consenting. Defendants did not follow through for another year and a half. C.f. Spaeth v. … The Supreme Court of New Jersey remanded the case, finding that the nod could qualify as direct evidence of age discrimination. Id.

GRECO v. GREWAL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 11, 2020

To the extent that Act qualifies as a criminal statute, there may indeed be a criminal analog. this Court finds the ERPO Act proceeding against Greco is quasi-criminal in nature. … Defendants argue there “clearly are ongoing state judicial proceedings” because the Complaint was commenced in the New Jersey Superior Court and “the state court continues holding status conferences.”

FORDEN v. ALLERGAN PLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 6, 2019

According to plaintiffs, Allergan’s statements specified in the complaint qualify as misrepresentations because they omit the fact that Allergan was participating in anticompetitive conduct in the generic drug … But also at the same time with the environment on the consolidation of the customers, clearly there is a pricing pressure overall in the market.

THE CUMBERLAND MUTUAL FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY v. NATIONWIDE E&S SPECIALTY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 3, 2025

DISCUSSION “Where parties’ briefs assume that a particular forum’s law controls, such implied consent . . . is sufficient to establish choice of law.” … The Cumberland Policy defines “insured” to mean “any person or organization qualifying as such under Section II – Who is An Insured.” (CP at 11 (preamble)).

EMAMI v. COMMUNITY INSURANCE COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 13, 2021

Aug. 3, 2021) (“As this Court has pointed out, New Jersey’s Revised Durable Power of Attorney Act, N.J.S.A. 46:2B-8.1, et seq., provides that ‘the principal authorizes another individual or individuals or a qualified bank … Because the denial letter sent to Amy M. on November 11, 2015, did not inform her of the shortened statute of limitations, the Court finds that Community has not clearly established that the three-year statute of limitations

CAPUTO v. WELLS FARGO ADVISORS

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

In addition, sometime during his tenure at Wells Fargo Advisors, Petitioner qualified to receive four separate “Production Bonuses” of $240,459.00, because his “total gross production” exceeded specific benchmarks set forth … At best, Petitioner’s arguments establish an alternate interpretation of the Notes as a forgivable loan.9 However, in order to vacate the Award, Petitioner must establish that the Award is “irrational”—

DALTON v. SAINT BARNABAS MEDICAL CENTER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2025

Plaintiff Fails To Allege Any Facts To Plausibly Establish Liability By The Individual Defendants Every claim in the TAC is asserted against multiple defendants, with … A statutory prerequisite to maintaining an action under § 1983 requires the defendants to have acted “under color of state law” with conduct that “deprived the plaintiff of rights, privileges, or immunities secured by

NOVO NORDISK INC. v. BECERRA

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

The plaintiff, as the party invoking federal jurisdiction, bears the burden of establishing standing. Id. … The IRA is a statute that directs the Secretary of HHS, acting through CMS, to establish the Program. 42 U.S.C. § 1320f(a).

DELPIZZO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

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

The claimant bears the burden of establishing the first two requirements, and failure to satisfy either of the first two requirements automatically results in denial of benefits. Bowen v. … The ALJ clearly considered Plaintiff’s depression at step four, but concluded that Plaintiff's symptoms did not significantly limit her basic work activities.”).

MALIK

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

However, the statement clearly means they met following the entry of the April 16, 2024 Order. … [H]owever, the Court cannot find that counsel’s prior illness is sufficient to qualify as an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ under Rule 60(b)[].”); Carcello, 192 F.R.D. at 64 (“[I]llness alone is not a sufficient basis for