Case law

Pollinger v. Loigman

256 N.J. Super. 257 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 29, 1992

Deiner, 97 N.J. 465 [ 479 A. 2d 393 ] (1984) (concluding that immunity varies in proportion to nature of official functions and range of decision-making discretion, and according qualified privilege to commissioners of municipal … While it may appear anomalous here for Pollinger to have absolute immunity, while a police officer issuing a report in a criminal investigation will be given only qualified immunity, as noted earlier, Pollinger's report was

MORRIESON v. CITY OF JERSEY CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 18, 2022

Qualified Immunity Defendants argue that Mendoza, Soto, Weaver, and Chidichimo are entitled to qualified immunity. Br. at 23-33. … “Qualified immunity shields government officials from personal liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would

Csizmadia v. Fauver

746 F. Supp. 483 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 17, 1990

Whether the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity regarding the Allen plaintiffs’ claims depends on whether the Allen plaintiffs had a clearly established privacy or free exercise right in not being viewed naked or … As the above cases indicate, there is no clearly established method for balancing these competing interests, and certainly no clearly dictated result.

Carey v. Davison

181 N.J. Super. 283 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 13, 1981

action appears to have been established. … While the decision in Gross clearly laid out the situations in which immunity would still apply, the decision does not recognize a cause of action for negligent supervision.

Casamasino v. City of Jersey City

304 N.J. Super. 226 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 2, 1997

tax assessor was not so apparent as to deprive him of the qualified immunity. … In so ruling, we are mindful that the availability of qualified immunity generally, when possible, should be decided on summary judgment. See Kirk v.

Blunt v. Klapproth

309 N.J. Super. 493 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 3, 1998

under the Act clearly is applicable. … Plaintiffs claim that a special *508 relationship between the police and himself is irrelevant as immunity is clearly established.

Hauptmann v. Wilentz

570 F. Supp. 351 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 11, 1983

Qualified immunity shields an official from liability for § 1983 damages “insofar as [his] conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.” … Once again, however, Wilentz satisfies the Harlow test of immunity, since his alleged conduct would not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.

Canova v. Canova

146 N.J. Super. 58 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 15, 1976

The burden of establishing such immunity as to any particular asset will rest upon the spouse who asserts it. … Plaintiff clearly made a gift. By this gift, then, was the property that was formerly his separate property still immunized from equitable distribution?

Carlino v. Gloucester City High School

57 F. Supp. 2d 1 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 2, 1999

Qualified Immunity The individual Moving Defendants are "entitled to qualified immunity if reasonable officials in the defendants' position at the relevant time could have believed, in light of clearly established law, that … Thus, qualified immunity provides government officials with leeway in applying difficult or murky law, even if that law is clearly established.

FARAGALLA v. JERSEY CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2020

Qualified Immunity Otundo also argues that he is entitled to qualified immunity. … With respect to the second step of a qualified immunity analysis, this Court must “identify the right at issue and determine if that right was clearly established at the time of the officer’s action.” Estep v.

Mantz v. Chain

239 F. Supp. 2d 486 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 30, 2002

QUALIFIED IMMUNITY FROM LIABILITY UNDER 42 U.S.C. § 1983 In moving for summary judgment of Mantz’s civil rights claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 , Defendants invoke the doctrine of qualified immunity. … In determining whether a police officer is entitled to qualified immunity, both the existence of a clearly established right and the objective reasonableness of the officer’s actions are questions of law for the Court to

Bieker v. Community House of Moorestown

327 N.J. Super. 467 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 25, 2000

entities which engage in activities that clearly are not charitable or educational, such as corporate meetings and workshops, weddings, baby showers and birthday parties. … Because charitable immunity is limited to non-profit entities that are organized “exclusively” for religious, charitable or educational purposes, the use of Community House’s facilities for non-qualifying purposes precludes

Mannington Mills, Inc. v. Shinn

877 F. Supp. 921 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 28, 1995

and defendants are entitled to qualified immunity. … Because defendants’ actions in this case, even if taken in bad faith, did not violate plaintiff’s clearly established constitutional rights, defendants are entitled to qualified immunity.

Rodriguez v. City of Passaic

730 F. Supp. 1314 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 21, 1990

Thus, for purposes of Kicha’s qualified immunity defense, plaintiff would be unable to show a violation of clearly established Fourteenth Amendment law. See Point V, infra. III. … Qualified immunity is predicated upon the “objective legal reasonableness” of an official’s conduct, and is warranted where that official has not violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights.

Jiosi v. Township of Nutley

332 N.J. Super. 169 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 20, 2000

As to the officers' claims of qualified immunity, such a defense must be analyzed in terms of whether clearly established law was violated and whether a reasonable person in the officers' position would have known that clearly … Allowing for the possibility that defendants Beard and Iannicelli violated clearly established law, an issue we believe that must be informed by a proper factual record, in order to avail themselves of qualified immunity

Centennial Land & Development Co. v. Township of Medford

165 N.J. Super. 220 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 3, 1979

Neb. 1976) (planning commissioners granted qualified immunity for *234 denial of variance); 2 David v. Nuss, 432 F. Supp. 44 (S. D. Tex. 1977) (Civil Service Board members granted qualified immunity) with Condosia v. … This court is of the view that the qualified immunity formula established in Wood v. Strickland would not sufficiently guard the policy sought to be protected here.

Brook v. April

294 N.J. Super. 90 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 30, 1996

The judge reasoned that, if the municipal defendants were immune under the Tort Claims Act, defendants in this suit could not be liable for omitting to file the notice required to qualify plaintiff as a claimant under that … The same conclusion governs the relationship between causes of action conferred by the Workers' Compensation Law and the categorical immunities established in the Tort Claims Act.

Mesgleski v. Oraboni

330 N.J. Super. 10 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 3, 2000

The legislative goal of the Act is "to re-establish immunity for all governmental bodies within its definition of `public entity.' … The Supreme Court set forth the defense of qualified (or good-faith) immunity and its purpose as follows: ...

Anastasio v. Planning Bd. of Tp. of West Orange

209 N.J. Super. 499 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 17, 1986

a clearly established constitutional right of plaintiff. … When a public official has a qualified immunity he is not liable for damages from conduct which does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

Centennial Land & Dev. Co. v. Tp. of Medford

165 N.J. Super. 220 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 3, 1979

Neb. 1976) (planning commissioners granted qualified immunity for *234 denial of variance); [2] David v. Nuss, 432 F. Supp. 44 (S.D. Tex. 1977) (Civil Service Board members granted qualified immunity) with Condosta v. … This court is of the view that the qualified immunity formula established in Wood v. Strickland would not sufficiently guard the policy sought to be protected here.