Case law

Pemberton Tp. v. State

171 N.J. Super. 287 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 12, 1979

State, supra , held that the Department of Institutions and Agencies was immune from zoning with respect to the establishment of a group home for multi-handicapped children. … From this analysis the conclusion emerges that there is a qualified immunity from local zoning for activities of the Department of Corrections.

Burg v. State

147 N.J. Super. 316 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 24, 1977

Div. 1976), that the language of the legislation made it clear that the basic legislative premise was to re-establish immunity for all governmental bodies within its definition of "public entity." … They charge that Boland "had a well defined and obvious history of emotional, psychological and psychiatric problems," and that the murder conviction "clearly is a history of violent behavior."

Matter of Hotel and Restaurant Emp. and Bartend. International Union

203 N.J. Super. 297 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 11, 1985

Appellants contend that all individuals appointed to union positions were qualified for the job. … The authority of the Casino Control Commission to confer testimonial immunity upon a witness is established by N.J.S.A. 5:12-67, which provides in part: *336 If, in the course of any investigation or hearing conducted under

Lawlor v. Cloverleaf Memorial Park, Inc.

106 N.J. Super. 374 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 10, 1969

Schwabacher's affidavit did no more than establish that the association, rather than the corporation, held title to the property. … Lawlor was not a beneficiary, it is difficult to *388 conceive who — except those already interred there — could qualify as such.

Leibig v. SOMERVILLE SENIOR HOUSING

326 N.J. Super. 102 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 24, 1999

To establish immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-6, it is also necessary to show that the design feature in question was contained in the construction plans, those plans were approved by the public entity, and the construction was … If all other elements of plan-or-design immunity had been present, would defendant have qualified for derivative immunity as a public contractor?

BENJAMIN EX REL. BENJAMIN v. Corcoran

268 N.J. Super. 517 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 1, 1993

The Legislature clearly expressed its intent that the N.J.F.H. be controlled, managed and governed by the board of managers as agents of the State. … Even if an issue of fact existed respecting whether the property characteristics of the N.J.F.H. grounds are sufficiently rural or semi-rural as to qualify for immunity under the Landowner's Liability Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:42A

Jackson v. Hankinson

94 N.J. Super. 505 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 1967

We think the spirit of the rule called for pleading the defense of qualified immunity of a municipality so as to avoid surprise. … Clearly, the rule of qualified immunity of municipalities from tort liability, although a defense disfavored by present-day courts, is nevertheless a manifestation of public policy such as to have justified entertainment

Lopez v. City of Elizabeth

245 N.J. Super. 153 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 7, 1991

Piccollella was qualified to speak to the resource allocation issue at all, in the absence of proof that he was part of or even aware of any decision-making process on the subject. … It is similarly appropriate to ask an entity that seeks qualified immunity for an allocation decision to prove it had a pothole because it decided to repaint road lines instead of filling potholes.

Peterson v. Ballard

292 N.J. Super. 575 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 15, 1996

The litigation privilege is firmly established in New Jersey case law. Hawkins v. Harris, 141 N.J. 207, 215 , 661 A. 2d 284 (1995). … However, in determining whether a common law immunity has been abrogated the Court stated the rule clearly: Our cases have proceeded upon the assumption that common-law principles of legislative and judicial immunity were

Allen v. SUMMIT CIVIC FOUNDATION

250 N.J. Super. 427 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 17, 1991

Defendant's certificate of incorporation clearly sets forth a charitable purpose. … Super. at 138 , 293 A. 2d 431 )] The Parker court went on to say: *433 Defendant clearly falls outside the scope of this definition.

Farias v. Township of Westfield

297 N.J. Super. 395 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 13, 1997

The burden of proof for establishing immunity lies with the public entity. Bligen v. Jersey City Hous. Auth., 131 N.J. 124, 128 , 619 A.2d 575 (1993). … In any event, the statutory weather immunity provided by N.J.S.A 59:4-7 would clearly apply, and therefore, the issue of liability under N.J.S.A 59:4-2 does not arise.

Patricia Bullock-Pierce v. Cabria Davis

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 2, 2025

Notwithstanding DeShaney and its exceptions, the sergeant asserts she is entitled to qualified immunity on the due process claims because the record does not clearly establish her failure to arrest the boyfriend would be … Finally, qualified immunity is a doctrine which shields government officials from civil liability when "their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person

Geyer v. Faiella

279 N.J. Super. 386 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 3, 1995

We note in this regard that prosecuting officials are not immunized under the law of this State for conduct constituting actual malice such as making knowingly false charges. See N.J.S.A. 59:3-14; Burke v. … The foregoing conclusions make it unnecessary for us to consider defendants' argument that the action for malicious prosecution must fail because their absolute immunity to the defamation claim provides a complete defense

Center for Molecular Med. v. Tp. of Belleville

357 N.J. Super. 41 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 17, 2003

"[W]hether a particular agreement is a lease depends upon the intention of the parties as revealed by the language employed in establishing their relationship ...." Thiokol Chem. Corp. v. … the asserted immunity. [ 329 N.J.Super. at 418-19 , 748 A. 2d 128 (emphasis added) (citations omitted).]

Crystal Ice-Bridgeton, LLC v. City of Bridgeton

428 N.J. Super. 576 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 13, 2012

“[T]he costs of denying immunity would inevitably be passed directly by public contractors to the immunized public entity, rendering meaningless the tort immunity where the contractor was merely doing what it contracted to … ” in "cases in which pre-deprivation process was impracticable because the plaintiff was deprived of property as the result of a[n allegedly] . . unauthorized act of a state employee”). " ‘Construction official' means a qualified

Township of East Brunswick v. Middlesex County Board of Freeholders

224 N.J. Super. 44 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 14, 1987

First, it must be established whether these particular defendants fall within the protection of the Act. … Clearly, Edgeboro is a privately owned and operated business and not a “public entity” which exercises governmental functions.

Cadmus v. LONG BRANCH BOARD OF EDUCATION AND INDUSTRIAL ASSOCS.

155 N.J. Super. 42 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 21, 1977

Div. 1976), the terminology of the Tort Claims Act makes it obvious that the goal of the Legislature was to reestablish immunity for all governmental subdivisions within its definition of "public entity," a description clearly … to provide for, among other things, the establishment of ancillary services and activities to enhance the value of the programs ( e.g., pre-service and in-service training for teacher coordinators, establishment of priority

Kyriakos v. STATE, DEPT. OF HUMAN SERV.

216 N.J. Super. 308 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 27, 1987

The statute itself resolves such a conflict when it states that "any liability of a public entity established by this act is subject to any immunity of the public entity." N.J.S.A. 59:2-1(b). Malloy v. … The Legislature has clearly expressed its desire that clinical judgments to house mental patients in the least restrictive environment should not create tort liability.

Wilson v. City of Jersey City

415 N.J. Super. 138 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 4, 2010

However, we find that Burd clearly did not engage in a blind transfer. … Plaintiffs contend that the Jersey City defendants do not qualify for Title 52 immunity because Jersey City was not acting as a PSAP.

Aversano v. PALISADES INTERSTATE

363 N.J. Super. 266 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 1, 2003

When liability is found, public entities and public employees are entitled to any immunity found in the TCA as well as any immunity established by the common law. Id. at 355-56 , 627 A.2d at 1094-95 . … subject to any immunity previously established by common law."