Case law

MCLEOD v. FITZPATRICK MCGOUGH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 24, 2022

Decisions on those matters clearly fall within a judicial capacity. … Second, as noted above, “New Jersey courts ‘have long recognized the existence of a qualified privilege that confers immunity upon a public official for defamation uttered in relation to matters committed by law to [his

SAUNDERS v. NJ DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 23, 2022

“To plead a cause of action under Ex Parte Young, a plaintiff must establish a present violation of federal law” and seek “prospective injunctive relief.” Gregory v. Admin. Office of the Courts of N.J., 168 F. … Title II of the ADA requires a plaintiff to show the following to establish a violation: “(1) he is a qualified individual with a disability; (2) he was either excluded from participation in or denied the benefits of some

Marks v. Snedeker

612 F. Supp. 1158 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 11, 1985

The continuing involvement of the state legislature, vis-a-vis the joint committee and the *1162 study commission, clearly counsels in favor of our abstention in this matter. … Nevertheless, it may write insurance for any qualified driver and not just those who present a high risk. 4 . The eight cases of which we are aware are those of Harry Ryan, Docket No. A-2432-84T7; Elaine M.

Mance v. Quest Diagnostics Inc. Voluntary Separation Agreement Plan

237 F. Supp. 3d 217 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 21, 2017

ERISA applies to “any employee benefit plan if it is established or maintained ... by any employer engaged in commerce.” 29 U.S.C. § 1003 (a). Severance plans may qualify as ERISA plans. See Alston v. Atl. Elec. … This further demonstrates the difficulty of objectively ascertaining the specific benefits due to qualifying employees.

KELLY v. CALLAHAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 1, 2024

DISCUSSION In moving to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint, Defendants contend that: (1) they are not “persons” subject to § 1983 liability; (2) they have Eleventh Amendment immunity; (3) Plaintiff does not establish … Callahan’s personal involvement in any unconstitutional conduct; and (4) Defendants have qualified immunity.

Pelham v. United States

661 F. Supp. 1063 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 4, 1987

. §§ 1346 (b), 2671-2680, operates as a waiver of traditional sovereign immunity. … Certain cases are excepted from this broad waiver of immunity under the “discretionary function exception.”

BRADY v. OFFICE OF THE COUNTY PROSECUTOR, COUNTY OF BERGEN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 28, 2020

While on its face § 1983 affords no immunities, the Supreme Court has “accorded certain government officials either absolute or qualified immunity.” Id. at 163–64. … To start, the State of New Jersey and the Office of the New Jersey Attorney General are clearly covered by the Eleventh Amendment and are immune from suit. See Lombardo v. Pa. Dep’t of Pub.

TEEL v. ELIASEN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 9, 2019

Qualified Immunity The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officers from civil liability under Section 1983 “so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly … At the second step, courts “decide whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of [the] defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Id.

W. A. Kraft Corp. v. Terrace on the Park, Inc.

337 F. Supp. 206 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 1, 1972

Those restrictions are more than a guarantee of immunity from inconvenient or distant litigation. They are a consequence of territorial limitations on the power of the respective States. … The O’Hare Court concluded ( 437 F.2d at 1177, n. 2 ,) “that the plaintiff has prima facie established in personam jurisdiction under the long arm statute does not relieve it from jurisdictional facts at trial.

Nusbaum v. CB Richard Ellis, Inc.

171 F. Supp. 2d 377 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 26, 2001

Clearly, an employer is in the best position to monitor and verify that an employee meets this basic qualification mandate. … Under that framework, a plaintiff must be able to establish that s/he (1) has a “disability,” (2) is a “qualified individual,” and (3) has suffered an adverse employment action because of a disability.

New York Shipbuilding Corp. v. United States

237 F. Supp. 995 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 2, 1965

It contends that what constitutes “normal production, output or operation” for this, as well as any particular taxpayer, is that established by the actual production experience up to the time of the alleged qualifying event … In Oxford, the qualifying event was a drought.

Sery v. Federal Business Centers, Inc.

616 F. Supp. 2d 496 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 14, 2008

In addition, the Serys executed a Qualified Subchapter S Trust Election pursuant to Section 1361(d) (2) of the Internal Revenue Code in which they consented to election and attested that their various trusts were qualifying … Again, Section 14A:7-12(2) of the NJBCA clearly provides the procedure for imposing restrictions on the transfer of Subchapter S shares.

Bell v. KA Industrial Services, LLC

567 F. Supp. 2d 701 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 25, 2008

In order for a plaintiff to establish a prima facie case of discriminatory discharge because of a handicap, he must establish that: (1) he is disabled or perceived to have a disability; (2) he was otherwise qualified to perform … Moreover, to the extent that the Amended Complaint may assert a violation of LAD for failure to accommodate, Bell need not establish that his replacement was similarly qualified. See Leshner v. McCollister’s Transp.

MARTZ v. CAMDEN COUNTY BOARD OF CHOSEN FREEHOLDERS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 31, 2019

of this Opinion, Defendants also request that this Court grant summary judgment on the basis of qualified immunity. … Qualified immunity protects government officials from liability as long as their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

In re Moy Jeung Dun

101 F. Supp. 203 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 26, 1951

. § 703, that the pre-existing disqualification from citizenship of the Chinese national remains, not by specific name but by exclusion from those qualified or eligible to be naturalized. … together with their body and household servants, and Chinese laborers who are now in the United States shall be allowed to go and come of their own free will- and accord, and shall be accorded all the rights, privileges, immunities

DEUTSCH v. MICROSOFT CORPORATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 17, 2023

In opposition, Microsoft argues that the Arbitrator’s orders were consistent with clearly established law. (Opp’n Br. at 17.) … Rather, in denying Petitioner’s Motion to Compel, the Arbitrator explained that Section 230(c)(2)(A) establishes provider immunity from civil claims for “any action voluntarily taken in good faith to restrict access to

SIMON v. GIANATIEMPO, M.D.

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

Whether Plaintiffs Have Established a Prima Facie Case Against Dr. … To establish a prima facie case of medical negligence based on a deviation from the standard of care, “a plaintiff must present expert testimony establishing: (1) an applicable standard of care, (2) a deviation from this

Sluka v. Landau Uniforms, Inc.

383 F. Supp. 2d 649 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 15, 2005

COBRA, 29 U.S.C. § 1161 , states that “each qualified beneficiary who would lose coverage under the plan as a result of a qualifying event is entitled, under the plan, to elect, within the election period, continuation coverage … Termination is listed as a “qualifying event” under 29 U.S.C. § 1163 .

CAMPS v. SCHOLTZ

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 23, 2020

qualified immunity. … “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

MILLER INDUSTRIES TOWING EQUIPMENT INC. v. NRC INDUSTRIES

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 2, 2023

A lawsuit “does not qualify for . . . immunity if it ‘is a mere sham to cover . . . an attempt to interfere directly with the business relationships of a competitor.’” Id. … Good cause is established on a showing that disclosure will work a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure.