Case law

FOUR S SHELL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY v. PMG LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

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

Lastly, the Court must clearly explain the facts and the legal principles underpinning its decision. Like a jury, the Court performed these duties fairly and impartially. … The appraisal, valuing the Station’s property at $2,355,000, clearly states that it is based exclusively on the Tim Horton’s letter of interest. (See id.).

Alpha Cepheus LLC v. Chu

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 20, 2019

The release clearly and unambiguously applies to the securities fraud claims in Counts One and Two, and Plaintiffs have not pled any legal ground sufficient to set it aside. … To qualify as a pattern, a Plaintiff must allege “that the racketeering predicates are related, and that they amount to or pose a threat of continued criminal activity.” H.J. Inc. v. Nw. Bell Tel.

PERRONE v. JOHNSON & JOHNSON

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

However, McMahon is clearly at odds with those cases. … Plaintiffs contend that if that were the case, ESOP fiduciaries would effectively have “total immunity” for breaches of the duty of prudence in connection with an investment in artificially inflated stock, because it is

FOUR S SHELL LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY v. PMG LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 22, 2020

Lastly, the Court must clearly explain the facts and the legal principles underpinning its decision. Like a jury, the Court performed these duties fairly and impartially. … The appraisal, valuing the Station’s property at $2,355,000, clearly states that it is based exclusively on the Tim Horton’s letter of interest. (See id.).

DEFRANK v. SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 26, 2020

But their claim under OCSPA is clearly pled as a misrepresentation claim. … To qualify as a “product liability claim” within the meaning of OPLA, a claim must “allege[] damages other than economic ones.” LaPuma v. Collinwood Concrete, 661 N.E.2d 714, 716 (Ohio 1996); Huffman v. Electrolux N.

UNIFORMED FIRE OFFICERS ASSOCIATION FAMILY PROTECTION PLAN LOCAL 854 v. AMARIN PHARMA, INC.

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

Whether IPPs will ultimately establish facts sufficient to prove each of their state antitrust claims is a question that remains to be addressed later in this litigation. … The Consolidated Complaint clearly asserts IPPs’ status as non-profits. (CC ¶¶ 11–16, 251.

CONNOR-MOORE v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 27, 2025

It is important that these findings be made at all levels of adjudication to clearly establish the basis for the determination or decision for the claimant and for a reviewing body including a Federal district … In the case presently before this Court, the ALJ’s discussion detailed not only why Plaintiff’s treatment qualified as conservative but 22 also provided

PATEL v. United States

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 22, 2022

To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, a defendant must establish an actual conflict of interest. Id. … The time period of the fraudulent scheme, 2006 to 2014, was clearly stated in the Information, the plea agreement, and in the factual basis questions at the plea hearing. Judge Walls advised Ms.

STEPIEN v. MURPHY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 7, 2021

The movant bears the burden of establishing “the threshold for the first two ‘most critical’ factors . . . . … Many, this Court included, have experienced the need to repeat themselves or to speak more loudly and clearly to be understood through a mask.

Opus Chartered Issuances S.A., Compartment 127 v. Eros International PLC

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

Litig., 264 F.3d at 267 (“[W]e do not establish a hard-and-fast rule; instead, we note only that a kind of ‘rule of reason prevails.’ … As a simple matter of English syntax, only one complaint can qualify as ‘the complaint’ – the article ‘the’ specifies one particular thing when followed by a singular noun. . . .

MAYER v. AETNA INC.

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

NYCC therefore has not established its ERISA standing. d. … Aetna argues, even if Plaintiffs establish an injury, it cannot be clearly traced to any specific conduct of Aetna impacting the Plan Bs. (Id. at 33.)

IN RE EROS INTERNATIONAL PLC SECURITIES LITIGATION

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

Litig., 264 F.3d at 267 (“[W]e do not establish a hard-and-fast rule; instead, we note only that a kind of ‘rule of reason prevails.’ … As a simple matter of English syntax, only one complaint can qualify as ‘the complaint’ – the article ‘the’ specifies one particular thing when followed by a singular noun. . . .

SCHRAUFNAGEL v. EROS INTERNATIONAL PLC

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

Litig., 264 F.3d at 267 (“[W]e do not establish a hard-and-fast rule; instead, we note only that a kind of ‘rule of reason prevails.’ … As a simple matter of English syntax, only one complaint can qualify as ‘the complaint’ – the article ‘the’ specifies one particular thing when followed by a singular noun. . . .

PERCELLA v. CITY OF BAYONNE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 9, 2020

Del. 2012)) (holding that the District Court did not abuse its discretion in determining that a lesser sanction than default judgment was warranted where, inter alia, the destroyed evidence was “not so clearly central … protected class; (2) who was qualified for and performing the essential functions of the job; but (3) suffered termination or other adverse employment action; and (4) others not in the protected class did not suffer

MARANO v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 20, 2021

In addition, Plaintiff testified that he has severe anxiety, which makes it difficult to think clearly or sleep. (A.R. 45.) … The ALJ then stated that he considered whether “paragraph C” criteria were satisfied, and determined that the evidence did not establish the presence of these criteria, because Plaintiff’s medical record did not establish

RIBARDO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 26, 2026

A diagnosis of impairment, by itself, does not establish entitlement to benefits under the Act”). … Walton, 535 U.S. 212, 214–15, 225 (2002) (explaining that, to qualify for disability insurance benefits, a claimant’s “inability to engage in any substantial gainful activity” caused by an impairment “must last, or must

BARBEE v. AMIRA NATURE FOODS, LTD.

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

to adequately allege affirmative falsity or a duty to disclose, (2) the Form NT–20–F was not actionable merely because Speck chose not to reference delisting and any misleading statements were immunized … Plaintiff adds that he has clearly pleaded primary violations and Speck is a control person. (Id. p. 28.)

KAMDEM-OUAFFO v. COLGATE PALMOLIVE COMPANY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2021

This suit clearly post-dates the state court action, as the state court complaint was dismissed with prejudice in its entirety on August 20, 2015, and Kamdem filed this suit close to three months later on November 4, 2015 … is whether the defendant, Hills used plaintiff’s confidential information inappropriately and whether the plaintiff’s information could possibly qualify [for] trade secret protection. . . .

RAVIKOVICH v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 4, 2025

However, the ALJ need include only “credibly established” limitations. Rutherford v. … where, inter alia, the claimant did not cast “doubt on medical records showing that when she participated in “active psychotherapy,” she was “relatively stable” and that “[u]nlike in Morales, there is no medical evidence clearly

DUPREY v. COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY

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

With respect to the Paragraph B criteria, Plaintiff argues the medical evidence clearly supports her marked limitation in all four areas of functioning. (Id.) … However, those statements alone are not sufficient to establish a physical or mental impairment or disability. Id.