Case law

New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection v. Exxon Mobil Corp.

381 F. Supp. 2d 398 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 24, 2005

The official immunity of the type asserted by Defendant is a colorable federal defense. Bahrs, 795 F.Supp. at 969 . … NJDEP does not dispute Defendant’s assertion that it is a person under the statute, and most courts have held that a corporation such as Defendant qualifies as a person. Crackau v.

RUIZ v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

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

right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.”

EDWARDS v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2020

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity, government officials “performing discretionary functions generally are shielded from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory … To resolve a claim of qualified immunity, courts engage in a two-pronged inquiry: (1) whether the plaintiff sufficiently alleged the violation of a constitutional right, and (2) whether the right was ‘clearly established

NASH v. COUNTY OF MERCER

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

Qualified immunity protects officials “from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Qualified immunity applies unless (1) the facts that a plaintiff has alleged show a violation of a constitutional right and, if so; (2) whether the right at issue was “clearly established” at the time of the defendant’s

WHITE v. CITY OF VINELAND

District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 12, 2020

Qualified immunity Qualified immunity “shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly … issue was clearly established when the conduct took place.

DEAN v. BOROUGH OF GLASSBORO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 12, 2021

The doctrine of qualified immunity provides that “government officials performing discretionary functions . . . … Properly applied, qualified immunity “protects ‘all but the plainly incompetent or those who knowingly violate the law.’”

PEARSON v. SWEENEY

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

oO Finally,’ Defendants argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity as to Plaintiff's claim as the basis for the claim was not clearly established. … “The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials who perform discretionary functions ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

VINTZILEOS

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

Defendants are entitled to qualified immunity unless they “(1) violated a constitutional right that (2) was clearly established when [they] acted.” Stringer v. Cnty. of Bucks, 141 F.4th 76, 85 (3d Cir. 2025). … Indeed, “the fact-bound nature of the clearly established inquiry combined with the dearth of facts at the pleading stage makes it difficult for a defendant to claim qualified immunity on the pleadings before discovery.

Summit Bank v. U.S. Department of Treasury-Bureau of Public Debt

24 F. Supp. 2d 382 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 30, 1998

The declaratory relief sought had a “conspicuous impact beyond establishing a right to the disallowed funds” and that this “prospective, independent significance ... makes it ... the primary relief sought by the State.” … Under the present circumstances, jurisdiction in the district court is not proper where, as here, “the [equitable] relief sought simply establishes the ... legal entitlement to the principal remedy, and does not expand it

ALI-X v. MCKISHEN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 11, 2019

“[O]fficers are entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless (1) they violated a federal statutory or constitutional right, and (2) the unlawfulness of their conduct was ‘clearly established … “The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.”

GWIAZDOWSKI v. MARUCA

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

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … (2) whether the constitutional right was clearly established.

CARTER v. RED BANK BOROUGH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 31, 2020

“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials ‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable … clearly established at the time of a defendant’s alleged misconduct.”

Berel Co. v. Sencit F/G McKinley Associates

710 F. Supp. 530 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 3, 1989

The Agency, established by the New Jersey Legislature in 1983, 13 emerged as the product of a consolidation of two previously existing agencies, the New Jersey Housing Finance Agency (“HFA”) (established to assist in financing … was, we do not think that mere preparation of the Agreement will suffice to establish liability. 7 .

Stinson v. Delaware River Port Authority

935 F. Supp. 531 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 2, 1996

In order to establish a prima facie case for discriminatory discharge, a plaintiff must show that: (1) he or she is a member of a protected class; (2) he or she was qualified for the position from which he or she was discharged … The DRPA does not dispute that the Plaintiff, as a woman, is a member of a protected class, or that she was qualified for the position from which she was discharged.

Starr v. Reynolds (In Re Reynolds)

193 B.R. 195 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 5, 1996

Appellants also appeal the Bankruptcy Court’s decision not to qualify Appellants’ real estate appraiser as an expert witness. … In defining the term “clearly erroneous” the United States Supreme Court has stated that “[a] finding is clearly erroneous when, although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left

FILIPOWSKI v. STACK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 25, 2025

Qualified Immunity (Individual-Capacity Claims) Even if Plaintiff had alleged underlying constitutional violations, which he has not, the individual defendants would be entitled to qualified immunity … No clearly established law confers a right to disregard a podium/decorum rule at a public meeting or to continue speaking after being ruled out of order in a legislative hearing.

GREENE v. ELIZABETH POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 26, 2023

Qualified immunity “shields government officials from suit and from liability if their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory of constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … the law was clearly established at the time of the violation.”

Altemose Construction Co. v. Atlantic, Cape May & Parts of Burlington, Ocean & Cumberland Counties Building Trades Council

493 F. Supp. 1181 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 19, 1980

When a motion is made under rule 12(b)(6) it will be denied unless there are clearly no set of facts that can be proved which might entitle the plaintiff to relief. Conley v. … Sherman Act jurisdiction could be established, rather, by demonstrating that the defendants’ brokerage activity had a substantial effect on interstate commerce. McLain v.

MORALES v. MAXWELL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 26, 2022

To establish whether qualified immunity applies, courts must determine (1) whether the defendant violated a constitutional right and, if so, (2) whether “the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged … Qualified Immunity Defendants nevertheless maintain that qualified immunity bars Plaintiff’s First Amendment retaliation claim because they did not violate any clearly established

FLORENTINO v. CITY OF NEWARK

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 31, 2020

Qualified immunity “is an immunity from suit rather than a mere defense to liability.” Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 526 (1985). … clearly established at the time of a defendant’s alleged misconduct.”