Case law

Danka Funding Co. v. Sky City Casino

329 N.J. Super. 357 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 21, 1999

"In the absence of a clearly expressed waiver by either the tribe or Congress, the Supreme Court has refused to find a waiver of tribal immunity based on policy concerns, perceived inequities arising from the assertion of … The circuit court found such an unequivocal statement in the agreement, was sufficient to establish a waiver. The Seventh Circuit also found an explicit waiver of immunity in Sokaogon Gaming Enterprise Corp. v.

Wunschel v. City of Jersey

208 N.J. Super. 234 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 25, 1986

But recognition of that circumstance does not end our inquiry for the New Jersey Tort Claims Act does not purport to establish the liabilities and immunities of a public employee in all of his endeavors. … But that was in the context of determin *240 ing the applicability of the fellow servant immunity of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 which specifies that the immunity arises in cases of compensable injuries when the plaintiff and defendant

Law v. Newark Bd. of Ed.

175 N.J. Super. 26 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 25, 1980

At the conclusion of trial the board renewed its motion, arguing that plaintiffs had failed to establish a standard of conduct by which the action of the board's employees were to be evaluated and that the board is immune … The record in this case clearly establishes that defendant board is not immune from liability by virtue of N.J.S.A. 59:3-11.

Cassidy v. Merin

244 N.J. Super. 466 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 1990

The first two statements were held to be "facts" and therefore protected by a qualified privilege which could be overcome only by proof of "actual malice." Id. … In the trial court, defendant sought summary judgment for that claim on the basis of the immunity established by R. 1:20-11(b).

In Re Manna

124 N.J. Super. 428 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 3, 1973

The contention that the statute establishing the S.C.I. ( N.J.S.A. 52:9M-1 et seq. ) offends Art. … The title clearly suggests that the object of the legislation is to create a temporary investigation agency.

Robertson v. Robertson

381 N.J. Super. 199 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 9, 2005

However, she contends that he would not have qualified for the job but for her support during the marriage. … As a consequence, we find that the husband in this case has met his burden of establishing the immunity of the USA Interactive stock options from equitable distribution.

Ruvolo v. US Steel Corp.

139 N.J. Super. 578 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 12, 1976

In return, the act immunizes the employer in such cases from tort liability. … Its courts, however, permit indemnification where a defendant tortfeasor can establish that his own negligence was only "passive," whereas the negligence of a joint tortfeasor was "active."

CP v. Piscataway Tp. Bd. of Educ.

293 N.J. Super. 421 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 15, 1996

In his oral opinion he stated: Clearly had there been any prior incidents or knowledge it would have been brought to the Court's attention. … Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law to the contrary, any property held in a qualifying trust and any distributions from a qualifying trust, regardless of the distribution plan elected for the qualifying trust,

Hauser v. Young Men's Christian Ass'n

91 N.J. Super. 172 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 21, 1966

S. 2A:53A-7 necessary for immunity, cannot be deprived of that immunity simply because it owns and operates a building. … It is significant that in so deciding the court found no problem resulting from the fact that plaintiff was temporarily residing in the defendant’s establishment, or that she was making payment for such *178 residency.

Fox v. Township of Parsippany-Troy Hills

199 N.J. Super. 82 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 1985

Plaintiffs are clearly wrong. … With regard to the immunity afforded by N.J.S.A. 59:2-3(d), the Supreme Court held that the public entity bears the burden of demonstrating resource allocation immunity.

Powers v. Union City Bd. of Ed.

124 N.J. Super. 590 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 5, 1973

They were clearly unlawful and beyond the proper good faith performance of his public functions. … The facts in this case do not qualify in that respect. Plaintiff is not entitled to reimbursement for his legal fees and expenses connected with the defense of the federal criminal charge.

Thompson v. BD. OF ED., MILLVILLE

20 N.J. Super. 419 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 27, 1952

respect to school districts, school boards, or other agencies or authorities created exclusively for school purposes, a large number of courts have observed that they are mere agencies or instrumentalities of the state, established … Not only is this apparent from an examination of the wording of the body of the act itself, but also from the title of the act, which reads: "An Act establishing the non-liability of counties, municipalities and school districts

Cranford Development Associates, LLC v. Township of Cranford

445 N.J. Super. 220 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 26, 2016

Clearly, the Township had no intention of ever allowing affordable housing to be constructed on the CDA site. … The court's authority to appoint Special Masters in Mount Laurel cases is well established. See Mount Laurel II, supra, 92 N.J. at 282-85.

Maule v. Conduit & Foundation Corp.

124 N.J. Super. 488 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 1973

If the Legislature establishes an earlier date, we of course, will abide by that decision. [55 N. … But the second proposition is qualified by limitations which compound the difficulties of one who assails the legislative decision.

Estate of Donville Campbell, Etc. v. Woodcliff Health & Rehabilitation Center

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 26, 2024

under the COVID Immunity Statute 2 and are immune from suit and liability under the PREP Act. 2 Defendants contend they also have immunity under Executive Order No. 112 (March 28, 2020), which provided immunity at … Although plaintiff has not clearly identified any recognizable duty defendants owed Mrs.

State ex rel. D. H.

153 N.J. Super. 490 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 9, 1977

Satisfied by Fidelity’s showing that it could not reasonably ascertain the juveniles’ identity by way of customary investigatory procedures, the Juvenile and Domestic Belations Court judge entered an order affording Fidelity qualified … applying this “delicate” balancing here, we would in any event have concluded that the policy of confidentiality would not have been unwarrantedly impinged upon where the effect of non-intrusion would be the fortuitous immunization

State v. Kenny

128 N.J. Super. 94 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 5, 1974

The very purpose of this statute would be defeated by an interpretation which qualified the transactional immunity to those subject matters covered during direct examination. … Finally, the prosecutor urged the jury to: * * * go into that jury room and deliberate and come back out to the courtroom and clearly and loudly enough for them to hear you, loudly enough for them to hear you in even in Hudson

Sanner v. Ford Motor Co.

144 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 6, 1976

It is undisputed that the United States Government procured the production of these vehicles in conformity with its own engineering specifications and submitted these specifications to qualified prospective bidders. … This rule is the means by which the Secretary of Transportation is directed to establish motor vehicle safety standards. 15 U.S.C.A. 1381 et seq.

Pinckney v. City of Jersey City

140 N.J. Super. 96 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 30, 1976

The basic approach taken by the Legislature was to reestablish sovereign immunity [1] and at the same time grant waiver of that immunity under circumstances and in accordance with conditions set forth in the Act. [2] In establishing … It is a firmly established rule in American jurisprudence that acts in derogation of sovereign immunity are to be strictly construed and that provisions which are conditions which the sovereign attaches to the waiver of immunity

Ruprecht v. Ruprecht

252 N.J. Super. 230 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 4, 1991

Noting that the court had abolished in an earlier case the rule of interspousal immunity in actions asserting intentional torts, defendant argued that where no physical injury is alleged, there should be immunity. … Division of property by degree of fault has clearly been disallowed in this state absent a showing of exceptional circumstances ...