Case law

De Gruchy v. Wilscot Land Co.

110 N.J. Eq. 80 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 19, 1932

But the defendant contends that the final decree entered in that proceeding, never having been reversed or modified, is final and conclusive upon all of the parties to it and, as such, is entirely immune from attack or impeachment … The charge as thus laid is conclusively established by the undisputed evidence, with the result that complainant is clearly entitled to the relief prayed for.

OLEXSAK v. JONES

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

Claims Against Defendant Officer Jones The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials from civil liability so long as “their conduct does not violate clearly established … In addition, the court must “decide whether the right at issue was ‘clearly established’ at the time of defendant’s alleged misconduct.” Id.

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.

Reid v. Gorsuch

67 N.J.L. 396 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 24, 1902

system of government the most familiar example •of “election” is that which is participated in by the people at large; at the same time it requires the use of the phrase “popular election,” or “election by the people,” to clearly … That these distinctions, and the uses of the terms “elect” and “appoint,” are well established in our fundamental and statute laws can readily be demonstrated.

Miller v. Domanski

26 N.J. Super. 316 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 18, 1953

The trial court refused to permit the doctor's supplementary qualifying testimony. … The tests shall be made by duly qualified physicians, to be appointed by the court.

Feesers, Inc. v. Director, Division of Taxation

20 N.J. Tax 201 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 20, 2002

The Tax Court found in United Jersey Bank that N.J.S.A. 13:lE-94e establishes three tests for determining whether any one of the fifteen items enumerated in the statute (see also N.J.A.C. 18:38-3.1) will qualify as a litter-generating … Since the products sold by plaintiff clearly satisfy the first test as goods which are produced, distributed, or purchased in disposable containers, packages or wrappings, they qualify as litter-generating products within

REGINA TASCA VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM (POLICE AND FIREMEN'S RETIREMENT SYSTEM)

458 N.J. Super. 47 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 28, 2019

Realizing she did not qualify for Service retirement benefits at that time, the Board notes that . . . … N.J.A.C. 17:2- 7.1(b)(7) ("The member's original enrollment date established in the former system shall be transferred into the new system.").

ALLAH

District Court, D. New Jersey · May 28, 2026

clearly established at the time of the proceedings. … The doctrine of qualified immunity shields government officials who perform discretionary functions “‘from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or

In Re Incorporation of Village of Loch Arbour

25 N.J. 258 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 4, 1957

The constitutional validity of the classification established by N. J. 8. A. 40 .T57-1 et seq. … As a constitutionally recognized scheme of government, that form seems clearly appropriate for the specified population unit when localized as described.

Feldman v. Lederle Laboratories

97 N.J. 429 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 30, 1984

We do not agree that the protective shield of comment k immunizes all prescription drugs. … A trial court’s determination is “not reversed [by an appellate court] unless it clearly appears that there was a miscarriage of justice under the law.” R. 2:10-1.

In Re Havens

229 B.R. 613 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 9, 1998

The matters before this court clearly involve matters arising under Title 11 pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 524 (a). Accordingly, this court has general jurisdiction over the Debtors’ claims. B. … The court, upon review of the statutory structure of the JUA, also found that the State, although it initially established the JUA as a independent entity, did not immunize itself from payment of the debts of JUA by virtue

Schultz v. Kott

131 N.J. Super. 216 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 13, 1974

as well as from the terms of the act itself and prior court construction, the intent of Congress in establishing the APTD program appears clearly to have been to provide assistance for needy persons unable to engage in a … Their expressed concern clearly was deprivation of earning capacity due to medically demonstrable permanent and total disability.

State v. Fay

127 N.J.L. 77 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 25, 1941

The challenged conversation with Haussling, in our opinion, was clearly admissible. … Rep. 724 ), fairly, accurately and clearly states the applicable law. It is free from reversible error. 3.

DICKERSON v. WALLKILL VALLEY REGIONAL HIGH SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 1, 2020

To determine whether qualified immunity applies, the Court considers two questions: (1) whether the official’s conduct violated a constitutional or federal right; and (2) whether that right was “clearly established … Government actors are entitled to qualified immunity unless they violate a constitutional right “so clearly established that ‘every reasonable official would have understood that what he was doing violates that right.’

Abbruzzese v. Berzak

412 F. Supp. 201 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 3, 1976

Dismissal based on sovereign immunity. Denied. See 39 U.S.C. § 401 granting the Postal Service power to sue and be sued in its official name. 4. Objections to parties. Denied. … Obstruction of the mails clearly violates this fundamental duty and is full and adequate ground for removal. The foregoing opinion constitutes the court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law.

Schultz v. Yeager

293 F. Supp. 794 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 21, 1967

There is no merit to petitioner’s claim of immunity. … The statute clearly grants immunity from criminal prosecution to an individual who, after claiming his privilege against self-incrimination, is compelled to testify or produce documentary evidence.

Puntasecca v. Violent Crimes Compensation Board

214 N.J. Super. 368 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 1986

In arriving at its conclusions the court noted that Krauth implies that an arsonist would not enjoy immunity. Id. at 572. … Clearly, the “fireman’s rule” does not itself bar a firefighter from recovery for injuries from an arson-caused fire.

Kelly v. Bally's Grand, Inc.

285 N.J. Super. 422 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 20, 1995

Bally expressed its policy on promotion as follows: It is the policy of Bally's Grand to encourage qualified employees to apply for promotional opportunities and to grant every consideration to qualified in-house candidates … Further, plaintiff facially appears to have been qualified for the position.

Harz v. Borough of Spring Lake

234 N.J. 317 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 26, 2018

In the end, however, Harz has not established that the Borough denied her the right to be heard before the Planning Board. … " substantive rights, privileges or immunities secured by the Constitution or laws of this State," N.J.S.A. 10:6-2(c).

State v. DeGeralmo

83 N.J.L. 135 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 1912

room, it being shown that he'was a garbage collector, and upon a comparison of finger marks found upon one of the posts of a portico, by which the guilty person ascended from the ground to the window of her room, a duly qualified … Tf this was true then he has established an alibi.