Case law

ROCHE

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

Supp. 3d 381, 390 n.1 (D.N.J. 2015) (citing Levine, 402 F.3d at 165) (“[T]he [Statute] is clearly a procedural statute.”). … Money qualifies as chattel for the purposes of a conversion claim, but only if “a particular pot of money was taken or wrongfully diverted to the defendant’s own use.” Dougherty v. Drew Univ., 534 F.

TherapeuticsMD, Inc. and Mayne Pharma LLC v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 8, 2026

The caveat is that any special definition given to a word must be clearly defined in the specification. … The Court cannot diverge from the well-established understanding of “consisting of” based on limited and ambiguous evidence.

MELEO v. BLINKEN

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

Ordinarily, to qualify for mandamus, the party seeking a writ of mandamus must meet three elements: “(1) a clear and indisputable right to relief, (2) that the [G]overnment agency or official is violating a clear duty … The court found the letter’s language “clearly indicate[d] that the decision on [the plaintiff’s] visa is still pending and not final.” Assad, 2013 WL 5935631, at *4.

SPINA v. METROPOLITAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY (METLIFE)

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 21, 2021

Plaintiffs claim was breached, it does directly outline the relevant requirements for receiving long-term care benefits under the Policy, and alleges that despite the fact that Dante Spina qualified … a bad faith claim, plaintiff must be able to establish, as a matter of law, a right to summary judgment on the substantive claim; if plaintiff cannot establish a right to summary

SMITH v. DOBIN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 14, 2020

However, the Clerk of Court’s quality control message dated October 1, 2019, clearly informed Plaintiff that her request for default could not be granted because she did not effectuate service under Federal Rule of Civil … No. 27-1), it appears that Plaintiff’s purported claims against the Judge Defendants would be barred under the doctrine of judicial immunity.

ROCHESTER DRUG CO-OPERATIVE, INC. v. ELI LILLY AND COMPANY DO NOT FILE IN THIS CASE

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

First, Defendants argue “[n]o court has ever held that the [Anti-Kickback Statute] qualifies as a RICO predicate.” (ECF No. 131-1 at 17 (collecting cases).) … GlaxoSmithKline PLC, 905 F.3d 694, 699 (3d Cir. 2018) (“To establish liability pursuant to § 1962(c), a plaintiff must establish the existence of an enterprise that exists separate and apart from the pattern of activity

LAX v. CITY OF ATLANTIC CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 27, 2019

The law quite clearly supports the Gilmore Defendants’ position. … Guided by Druz, such allegations are insufficient to establish a special grievance.

TOBIA v. LAKEWOOD BOARD OF EDUCATION (LBOE)

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 14, 2020

The arbitration decision in this matter clearly carries preclusive effect. … Plaintiff’s First Amendment and Equal Protection claims under § 1983 are clearly precluded in this case.

JEMISON v. JEMISON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 29, 2021

Although Plaintiff asserts that these transactions constituted a conflict of interest, the NJBCA clearly provides that a director approving his or her own compensation, is not a conflict of interest, and thus, does not … Plaintiff argues “the fact that [William] and Michael, along with Susan, voted as a majority to approve the sale of Metals to a company owned by Michael and his children in no way immunizes Defendants if that sale violated

WASHINGTON v. ELLIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 25, 2023

You cannot clearly see Plaintiff’s hands or handcuffs. While the video does not appear to show officers twisting or tightening Plaintiff’s handcuffs, it does not clearly show that they did not. (Id.) … When asked by Plaintiff why he was not sent to the hospital, Defendant Grier explained that “inmates are sent to the hospital based on the directives of qualified medical personnel.” (Id.)

United States v. United States Steel Corp.

223 F. 55 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 3, 1915

Ed. 1232 , the Supreme Court, referring to its former decisions, clearly defines what the statute forbids and does not forbid as follows: “Tliose cases may be taken to have established that only such contracts and combinations … Was it because you were becoming established, or why? “A.

WILLIAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2022

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Jones, 364 F.3d at 504 (citation omitted). … Simpkin’s finding that the medical evidence “was insufficient to establish a severe physical impairment” because: (1) Dr.

WILLIAMS v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2022

An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.” Jones, 364 F.3d at 504 (citation omitted). … Simpkin’s finding that the medical evidence “was insufficient to establish a severe physical impairment” because: (1) Dr.

GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE CO. v. CARING PAIN MANAGEMENT PC

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2023

Congress enacted the Federal Arbitration Act (“FAA”) to establish a strong federal policy in support of private arbitration agreements. MZM Constr. Co., Inc. v. New Jersey Bldg. … With respect to their IFPA claim, Plaintiffs contend the statutory language alongside “every court to have considered the issue” compels this Court to find immunity from arbitration. (ECF No. 17 at 19.)

V. v. CHERRY HILL BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 21, 2025

services under the IDEA, as well as a qualified individual with a disability under Section 504 and the ADA. [Id. at ¶ 2.] … Judicial Imprimatur This, however, is not enough to establish that the Plaintiffs are prevailing parties.

BROTHERS HOLDING LLC v. TOWNSHIP OF WEEHAWKEN

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

Supp. 3d 148, 165 (S.D.N.Y. 2020) (“The economic impact of EO 202.28 can only qualify as a regulatory taking if it ‘effectively prevented [Plaintiffs] from making any economic use of [their] property.’” … Therefore, the economic impact of the action clearly weighs against a finding that Plaintiff has sufficiently alleged a regulatory taking. 4.

Maertin v. Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

241 F. Supp. 2d 434 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 11, 2002

This action against Armstrong and its insurers for damages obtained from the Maertin I action would surely qualify as “any rights ... in connection with [the Maertin I ] action.” … After the passage of the bar date, the creditor cannot participate in the reorganization unless it can establish sufficient grounds for its failure to file. Id.

FED CETERA LLC v. NATIONAL CREDIT SERVICES INC

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

In exchange, NCS agreed not to “solicit Federal contractors for purposes of establishing a subcontracting or teaming relationship” on its own and agreed to refer all solicitations to Fed Cetera during the Agreement term … NCS argues the plain language of the Agreement “clearly reflects the intent of the parties to enter an agreement to facilitate a subcontracting and/or teaming arrangement, and not a primary contract” with

PETERSEN v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

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

No specific weight or BMI establishes obesity as a “severe” or “not severe” impairment. … An impairment that manifests only some of those criteria, no matter how severely, does not qualify.’”

SANDOVAL v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 26, 2021

Under this definition, a Plaintiff qualifies as disabled only if her physical or mental impairments are of such severity that she is not only unable to perform her past relevant … Although the sentence could have been drafted more clearly, that interpretation appears to be correct.