Case law

Brett T. Duffy v. the Absecon Police Department

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 30, 2025

To establish a prima facie LAD failure-to-accommodate claim, a plaintiff must demonstrate that he or she (1) "qualifies as an individual with a disability, or [] is perceived as having … Hagans, 233 N.J. 30, 38 (2018), the Absecon police defendants would—at this stage of the litigation—be unable to rely upon qualified immunity for dismissal of that claim.

Township of Edison v. Coleman

239 N.J. Super. 301 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 9, 1990

repeatedly or habitually failed to enforce the Code, it further concluded that appellant’s argument that a local enforcing agency was entitled to notice and an opportunity to be heard before DCA could assume jurisdiction was clearly … We note that this regulation was amended, effective November 6, 1989, to clearly indicate its inapplicability to the kind of proceedings involved in this appeal. 21 N.J.R. 3460-3461.

GAGE v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 28, 2022

Nor does it identify any clearly established law that the Court overlooked when ruling that Ruschke was entitled to qualified immunity. … None of Gage’s arguments persuade the Court that its immunity rulings—which rested on /egal grounds—were in error.

State v. Boiardo

82 N.J. 446 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 5, 1980

Handler, J., dissenting — Legislature meant to qualify privilege. … This qualified privilege, under Branzburg , would clearly give way to a Sixth Amendment right to compulsory process.

Riehm v. Director

7 N.J. Tax 88 · New Jersey Tax Court · Dec 5, 1984

The Director contends that the court is free to fashion a reasonable remedy regardless of the basis of the violation, and he points to the Salorio Court’s citations to cases concerning Equal Protection, the Establishment … Matthews, supra, clearly supports the conclusion that, in some circumstances, the court can permit a remedy that violates taxpayers’ constitutional rights.

Hamilton v. New Jersey Department of Corrections

366 N.J. Super. 284 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 28, 2004

Demskie, 892 F.Supp. 503, 506-07 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) (granting qualified immunity to prison official in prisoner’s § 1983 action on the ground that it was not clearly established that reasonable suspicion must exist to support

Di Ciurcio v. Liberty Mutual Insurance

299 N.J. Super. 426 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 1997

(Neither Liberty nor Allstate *429 contends that plaintiff failed to comply with the procedures established in Longworth v. … analysis if the Allstate policy purchased by plaintiffs father provided only $15,000/$30,000 UIM coverage, thereby making plaintiff ineligible for UIM benefits under the Allstate policy, while the terms of the Liberty policy clearly

IBRAHIM v. EMRICH

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 29, 2025

Jd. at *8-9 (concluding that Defendants fail to meet their burden under the second prong of the qualified immunity defense). … al-Kidd, 563 U.S. 731, 735 (2011) (stating that, to overcome a claim of qualified immunity, a plaintiff must show: “(1) that the official violated a statutory or constitutional right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly

Baglini v. Lauletta

315 N.J. Super. 225 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 9, 1998

This case differs from Ruberton in that the filing and service of the complaint in the Lauletta action clearly constituted the issuance of process. … Defendant appealed the judgment entered upon jury verdict arguing that the evidence was insufficient to establish the tort of abuse of process. Id.

GURVEY v. TOWNSHIP OF MONTCLAIR NEW JERSEY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 31, 2022

Qualified Immunity The second prong of the qualified immunity analysis asks whether the constitutional rule which was allegedly violated was “clearly established” at the time … The “clearly established” prong of the qualified immunity analysis “shields officials from civil liability so long as their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

Bernatowicz v. Colgate-Palmolive Co.

785 F. Supp. 488 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 10, 1992

Thereafter, around August, 1987, Sponseller told Bernatowicz that Ber-natowicz did not qualify for “85 point” benefits. … I need not address this argument, because plaintiffs’ state law claims are clearly preempted by ERISA.

State v. Zeus

56 N.J. Super. 323 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 29, 1959

A policeman testified that it was a residential district, but on cross-examination it appears clearly that he did not have in mind the statutory definition. … Essex County Court of Special Sessions, supra, and by the amendment indicated a change in intendment as established by the cited case.

Mutch v. Division of Taxation

9 N.J. Tax 612 · New Jersey Tax Court · Apr 15, 1988

An employer may not enter into a SEP agreement with an employee unless all eligible employees have established an IRA. … Contrarily, because of the clear distinction between the two sections, by explicitly limiting only section 401(k) contributions from gross income in the 1983 amendment, N.J.S.A. 54A:6-21, the Legislature clearly indicated

State v. Porambo

226 N.J. Super. 416 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 18, 1988

Under these circumstances, we conclude that this testimony was not "clearly capable of producing an unjust result." R. 2:10-2. See State v. … These arguments are clearly without merit and do not require extended discussion. R. 2:11-3(e)(2). However, we make the following brief comments.

Fioriglio v. City of Atlantic City

996 F. Supp. 379 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 5, 1998

Clearly, this issue, in view of the fact that there were upcoming vacancies, battalion chief was an issue that needed to be resolved. … Absolute or Qualified Immunity Defendants Whelan and Gallagher have both put forth the defense of absolute and/or qualified immunity.

Delcampo v. New Jersey Automobile Full Insurance Underwriting Ass'n

266 N.J. Super. 687 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 15, 1993

Subject the procedures established in the plan of operation, producers shall have authority to issue binders to qualified applicants. … N.J.S.A 17:30E-3(m) (emphasis added) defines the term “qualified applicant” as follows: m.

Agha v. Feiner

198 N.J. 50 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 26, 2009

We agree with the Appellate Division that, over a defense objection, the testifying physicians could not establish the substance of the contested MRI and that only an expert qualified to interpret an MRI could do so. … Thus, on objection, neither could establish the substance of the MRI report.

Lavino v. Lavino

23 N.J. 635 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 25, 1957

In order to succeed in establishing an inchoate right of dower in the property, the plaintiff attacks the constitutionality of N. J. … Hampton Holding Co., supra, it is not immune from a legislative bar. The judgment is affirmed. For affirmance — Chief Justice Vanderbilt, and Justices Heher, Oliphant, Burling, Jacobs and Weintraub — 6.

Loftus v. Fraz

43 N.J.L. 667 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1881

It is an established principle, absolutely necessary to the proper discharge of the judicial functions, that no action will lie against a judge acting in a judicial capacity, for any errors which he may commit, in a matter … That was the evidence of his adjudication. *670 When the affidavit was presented to him it was clearly his judicial duty, made so by the statute, to decide whether the facts therein stated authorized the issuing of a warrant

McRae v. St. Michael's Medical Center

349 N.J. Super. 583 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 8, 2002

Plaintiffs proofs established that she had a net annual income prior to the accident of $26,000. … Michael's to $250,000 pursuant to the charitable immunity statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-8.