Case law

Risoldi v. Risoldi

320 N.J. Super. 524 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 3, 1999

Risoldi['s] pension, and that will be done through a qualified domestic relations order. … Clearly, the portion of the contributions and services to the plan made during the marriage relate to the joint efforts of the marital partners.

ROSTISLAV VILSHTEYN VS. POLICE OFFICER MININO GOROSPE (L-4417-16, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 2020

When a plaintiff claims that he was unlawfully arrested, an officer—like here—can assert qualified immunity by establishing that there existed probable cause or that a reasonable officer would have believed that probable … If the right was not clearly established at the time, the inquiry ends there, and the officer is entitled to qualified immunity. Saucier, 533 U.S. at 199.

Grant W. Morgan v. Raymours Furniture Company, Inc.

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 7, 2016

The main and novel legal issue presented to us is whether the qualified immunity from civil liability granted to funeral directors under N.J.S.A. 45:7-95 and N.J.S.A. 45:27-22(d) extends to interns who are employed by funeral … We conclude that the statutory immunity does extend to such interns. The trial judge consequently did not err in charging the elements of the immunity to the jury. 10/21/15 CAROL JACOBY VS.

Evans-Aristocrat Industries, Inc. v. City of Newark

140 N.J. Super. 226 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 17, 1976

It is obvious the Legislature realized the catastrophic effect an injunction might have on the various public projects under the control of the Port Authority, and established safeguards so that such suits were maintainable … commissioners, officers or employees except upon complaint of the Attorney-General of either State, each of whom is expressly authorized to bring any proceeding for an injunction, in his discretion, on behalf of any person. *232 Clearly

State v. Ashby

81 N.J. Super. 350 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 29, 1963

Pometti the court stated (at p. 521) that even if such an agreement were made, defendant is charged with the knowledge that it is clearly illegal. … His letter to Judge Wick clearly set out that fact.

LEONARD BEST, ETC. VS. CITY OF NEWARK (L-9051-12, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 11, 2019

In order to rebut the assertion of qualified immunity, plaintiff was required to show Ruane violated a "constitutional 'right [that] was clearly established' at the time that [Ruane] acted." Brown, 230 N.J. at 98. … The Third Circuit also rejected the officer's claim as to the second prong of the qualified immunity doctrine, that is, that he did not violate some clearly established constitutional right. Id. at 917.

L.C. VS. MIDDLESEX COUNTY PROSECUTOR'S OFFICE (L-1292-17, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 9, 2021

Qualified immunity shields government 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 … There's no clearly established privacy right violated by disclosure of juvenile records and the [MCPO] defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Smith v. Eastern Airmotive Corp.

99 N.J. Super. 340 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 9, 1968

The New Jersey Study Committee Comment to 12A:9-310, in discussing aircraft liens under Note 3 states: "A qualified lien and lienholder under N.J. … The federal court rejected the Government's sovereign immunity theory, saying: "Liens on government property might well cripple the United States in carrying out its sovereign functions.

Boyd v. Conrail

291 N.J. Super. 608 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 2, 1996

There's evidence — or there's case law from other states that clearly indicate that there's no particular duty to provide a watchman. … Conrail was clearly on notice that persons constantly and persistently intruded upon a particular area within the land.

Tull v. State

125 N.J. Super. 272 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 18, 1973

Their affidavits clearly placed each of them outside of As-bury Park at the time of the Tull incident. … The State’s immunity in such matters, *276 even prior to the passage of N. J. S. A. 52 :4A-1, is clear. See, e. g., Fitzgerald v. Palmer, 47 N. J. 106 (1966).

KENNETH FRANCO VS. FAIRLEIGH DICKINSON UNIVERSITY (L-5362-16, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 25, 2021

"The public clearly has an interest in deterring the unnecessary destruction and maiming of lives on our roadways and highways." Id. at 226. … "[A]n entity qualifies for charitable immunity when it '(1) was formed for nonprofit purposes; (2) is organized exclusively for religious, charitable or educational purposes; and (3) was promoting such objectives and purposes

Nesmith v. Walsh Trucking Co.

247 N.J. Super. 360 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 27, 1989

Accordingly, defendants concluded that the jury was clearly entitled upon the evidence to find Braden was not negligent. … He was qualified to render an expert opinion based upon facts in evidence, his education, training and experience.

Richard Caporusso v. New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services

434 N.J. Super. 88 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 13, 2014

Listing the specific debilitating medical conditions to which the use of medicinal marijuana is permitted, N.J.S.A. 24:6I-3, the Act directs DOH to establish a registry of qualifying patients … Accordingly, immunity generally applies and "liability is the exception." Fluehr v. City of Cape May, 159 N.J. 532, 539 (1999). See also Dickson v.

Citro v. STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY, ETC.

55 N.J. Super. 295 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1959

Justice Case in a dissenting opinion in Milstrey ( 6 N.J. at page 424 ) referred to the foregoing statement from Saco and clearly defined its significance. … The main issue in the Milstrey case was municipal immunity from liability. A reading of the majority and minority opinions indicates substantial concurrence in the applicable rule of contributory negligence.

Rubanick v. Witco Chemical Corp.

242 N.J. Super. 36 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1990

Thus, a cause-effect relationship need not be clearly established by animal or epidemiological studies before a doctor can testify that, in his opinion, such a relationship exists. … Balis, as a biochemist, was qualified to testify as to causation in specific human beings.

Eason v. NJAFIUA

274 N.J. Super. 364 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1994

At oral argument on the summary judgment motion, the attorney for JUA conceded that someone other than plaintiff filled out the application. *369 Plaintiff was, however, sent renewals of her insurance policy clearly setting … The statute provides: A public entity is liable for injury caused by a condition of its property if the plaintiff establishes that the property was in dangerous condition at the time of the injury, that the injury was proximately

Marshall v. Force MacHinery Co.

123 N.J. Super. 497 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 10, 1973

Clearly, the act was made applicable to first aid squad workers by virtue of N.J.S.A. 34:15-43. Compulsory insurance for the benefit of such workers was mandated by N.J.S.A. 34:15-43. … The co-employer is therefore entitled to invoke a complete statutory immunity in such cases, as compared to the statutory limitation of liability invoked by the employer in Farren .

State v. Bryant

217 N.J. Super. 72 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 24, 1987

On closer examination it can readily be seen that this case falls within the principles established in State v. Burgos rather than those of State v. Williams . … The intent implied by the binding and gagging of the elderly victims was clearly that they be restrained for some substantial period to facilitate the robbers' flight from the scene.

IAN M. SCHWEIZER v. NEW JERSEY STATE POLICE (L-1733-19, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 8, 2022

On the merits, the judge determined DeLorenzo was entitled to qualified immunity because he had not violated any of Schweizer's "clearly established" rights and had acted with probable cause. … However, the doctrine of qualified immunity shields law enforcement officers and other government officials "'from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or

Ge Capital Mortg. v. Nj Title Ins.

333 N.J. Super. 1 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 10, 2000

Plaintiff insists that it should be permitted to utilize the court system to establish a viable and enforceable claim against the Fund. … This proposed collateral approach would directly violate the procedure established by our Supreme Court for the processing of such claims.