Case law

May v. Cooperman

578 F. Supp. 1308 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 25, 1984

In this case, the defendant-intervenors were clearly the party in interest. … When he stepped outside of his judicial function by intervening in the case he lost his immunity. 7 . Defendant-intervenors claim they "preserved” their immunities on filing suit.

Douglass v. Spear

97 N.J. Eq. 25 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Mar 30, 1925

Defendant Equitable Estates Corporation was formed to take title to these properties, and upon the conveyances being made by complainant to that corporation on the date named its stock, except what is known as qualifying … Any suggestion that defendant corporation, as such, was the recipient of the legal title under the conveyances, and is immune from attack because it did not participate in their improper procurement, is untenable.

Borough of Edgewater v. Connoil Corp.

4 N.J. Super. 338 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1949

Thus the facts and circumstances in each case must clearly and convincingly establish the right to exemption within the statute granting exemption, otherwise the general rule is invoked which subjects `all property to a just … A careful study of all the proofs, and legitimate inferences properly deducible therefrom, satisfies us that defendant failed to carry the burden imposed upon it by law to clearly and convincingly establish it was entitled

Scully v. Borough of Hawthorne

58 F. Supp. 2d 435 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 28, 1999

Qualified Immunity For Chief Noble Chief Noble argues he is entitled to qualified immunity’ from the Section 1983 claims raised by Scully. See Individual Defendants Moving Brief at 33-36. … Only after the alleged constitutional violation has been established should the question of qualified immunity be addressed. See Assaf, 178 F.3d at 173 .

Kanengiser v. Kanengiser

248 N.J. Super. 318 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 14, 1991

The statements in the Span letter clearly satisfy both prongs of this test. … The opinion clearly establishes that this was the law in the State of New Jersey since 1981, and also indicates that because of your dual role you would actually forfeit the real estate commission, even if you had been a

Ptaszynski v. Uwaneme

371 N.J. Super. 333 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 21, 2004

After the judge dismissed the jury, he granted the reserved Rule 4:40-1 motions for judgment by Olah and Ptaszynski, finding they were entitled to qualified immunity on the § 1983 claims. III. … They submit that because the individual police officers were not immunized from liability for intentional torts pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:3-3 and -14, notice was not required.

MILLS v. GOLDEN NUGGET ATLANTIC CITY, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 24, 2020

Nonetheless, a right can be clearly established without “a case directly on point.” Id. … Defendants are not entitled to qualified immunity.

Lieberman v. Port Authority

254 N.J. Super. 456 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 5, 1992

The Court of Appeals held that the failure of the employees who saw the attack to summon aid was outside of the boundaries of the policy-based governmental immunity established in Weiner, supra, 448 N.Y.S.2d 141 , 433 N.E … established.

ROUNDTREE

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 26, 2026

Qualified Immunity Qualified immunity shields government officials from liability unless (1) the facts, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, make out … standard to the jury’s findings to resolve qualified immunity as a matter of law.

State v. Nolfi

141 N.J. Super. 528 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 8, 1976

IV, § 2, cl. 1 *534 (Privileges and Immunities). … Defendant clearly falls within that group of offenders at whom the PTI program is aimed.

In re Long Branch Manufactured Gas Plant

388 N.J. Super. 254 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 16, 2005

It was clearly relevant to the litigation, which revolved around the payment of benefits to striking employees. Ibid. … Ibid. 14 In this regard, H & R claimed that, because it regularly distributed information to the public, it qualified as a member of the news media. Ibid.

Weiser v. County of Ocean

326 N.J. Super. 194 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 30, 1999

See Report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Sovereign Immunity (May, 1972). … Extension of governmental tort liability in the manner urged by plaintiff here would clearly subvert the plainly expressed legislative mandate which is to immunize public bodies except where there is a statutory declaration

STILE v. HOLLINGSWORTH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 4, 2020

right, and that the right was ‘clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.’” … Defendants submit they are entitled to qualified immunity. (Id.)

State v. North

197 N.J. Super. 349 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 8, 1984

His work culminated in three detailed drawings which clearly qualify as “plans.” … established such projects as off limits to engineers.

PARISI v. WIGGINS

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 31, 2024

The DOH Defendants’ Arguments for Qualified Immunity The DOH Defendants also argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the constitutional right at issue was not clearly established. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct “‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known

State v. Fass

36 N.J. 102 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 6, 1961

of religion" or as establishing or tending to establish "one religious sect in preference to another." … Clearly the conduct of defendant's business as described above would have rendered the immunity inapplicable prior to 1959.

O'MALLEY v. Department of Energy

212 N.J. Super. 114 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 20, 1986

Clearly, the limitations engrafted upon provisional appointments evince an intent that they be utilized only as stop-gap measures so that the public business might not be interrupted pending the establishing of employment … we further direct the Department of Civil Service to proceed to conduct the necessary qualifying examination for the establishment of such list.

Camden County Recovery Coalition v. Camden City Board of Education for the Public School System

262 F. Supp. 2d 446 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 16, 2003

The burden of proving that Eleventh Amendment immunity applies is put on the party attempting to assert such immunity. Christy v. Pennsylvania Turnpike Comm’n., 54 F.3d 1140 , 1144 (3d Cir. 1995). … P. 12(b)(6), had the Defendants not qualified for Eleventh Amendment immunity.

United States v. RJ Reynolds Tobacco Company

325 F. Supp. 656 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 7, 1971

Bi-State Development Agency, 303 F.Supp. 560, 561 (E.D.Mo.1969), where the court reiterated the well-established principle that “the Commission’s approval of an application under 49 U.S.C. § 5 relieves the acquiring carrier … While the technicalities of intrastate bus transportation would be amenable to the informed judgment of the Commission, the nature and complexities of marine transportation of freight in foreign commerce would clearly be

J. J. Nugent Co. v. Sagner

151 N.J. Super. 189 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 24, 1977

Me agree with the trial judge’s conclusion in this regard and note that while sovereign immunity was still the general rule, some limitations thereon had already been established by legislation and judicial decree. … Clearly, the Department of Transportation falls within the definition of “State.”