Case law

Township of Mahwah v. Bergen County Board of Taxation

98 N.J. 268 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jan 14, 1985

S.A. 30:9-24 allows counties of the first class to establish maternity hospitals, issue bonds, and tax for the payment of those bonds; N.J. … to ever qualify for the rebate.

State v. XYZ Corp.

232 N.J. Super. 423 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 21, 1989

The principal question raised by this appeal is whether a corporation is a “person” qualified to petition for expungement pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2C:52-1, et seq. … However, “since denial of expungement in the context of an acquittal would constitute an unusual exercise of judicial power, the facts established should clearly convince the court that the need for the availability of the

Bulloch v. United States

487 F. Supp. 1078 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 27, 1980

Tool Co., 64 N.J. 159 , 313 A.2d 609 (1974) (despite lack of legal marriage, de facto spouse qualifies as dependent under workers’ compensation statute). … Similarly, the common law conception of the marital relationship has not been immune to reexamination. See, e. g., Trammel v.

Abbamont v. Piscataway Township Board of Education

138 N.J. 405 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 22, 1994

According to plaintiff, MeGarigle discovered at that meeting that the inspector had not been qualified to check air quality. … Moreover, the failure of the Legislature to include in CEPA an immunity from punitive damages or to refer to TCA is significant.

GRECO STEAM CLEANING v. Associated Dry Goods Corp.

257 N.J. Super. 594 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 13, 1992

It clearly is. The question is whether this franchise is one which falls within Section 4 of the Franchise Practices Act. … Mere distribution through an office or warehouse would not qualify." *599 Sweeney, Applying Franchise Act to Terminated Distributors, 125 N.J.L.J. 680 (1990).

Ponte v. Overeem

337 N.J. Super. 425 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 26, 2001

. *505 The purpose of the Act was to reestablish the immunity of public entities while relieving some of the harsh results of the doctrine. See N.J.S.A. 59:1-2. … A total permanent loss of use would qualify. We doubt, however, that the Legislature intended that a claimant could recover only for losses that were total.

RICHARDSON v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 31, 2023

As a suit against a state department “is no different from a suit against the state itself,” and as states are immune from suit for money damages in federal court, the DOC is immune from suit for damages in this Court. … The DOC is therefore clearly immune from any suit for damages in this Court and is in any event not subject ' Although Plaintiff does not specify which type of ADA claim he wishes to pursue, the Court presumes that he

O'BOYLE v. Prudential Ins. Co.

241 N.J. Super. 503 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 6, 1990

Her employer's disability plan was a qualified private plan established and approved under our Temporary Disability Benefits Law in lieu of the State plan, N.J.S.A. 43:21-25 to -42. … The establishment of a supplementary plan by Sears was permitted "without [State] approval." N.J.S.A. 43:21-36.

Gilliland v. Board of Review

298 N.J. Super. 349 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 5, 1997

A claim for Unemployment Insurance Benefits was filed effective 4/23/95, establishing a base year from 1/1/94 to 12/31/94____ The petitioner requests that the base year be moved to an earlier 12 month period, wherein he would … Section (3) provides a similar definition for individuals who qualified for workers’ compensation benefits during a period of disability.

In Re Petition of Hartnett

163 N.J. Super. 257 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 27, 1978

It was his opinion that a temporary absence from the established residence accompanied by an express intention to return does not suffice to qualify for a valid vote in the district, whether it be in person or by absentee … Reliance upon Worden as a springboard for disqualifying the absentee voters herein is clearly misplaced.

D'Arienzo v. Clairol, Inc.

125 N.J. Super. 224 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 21, 1973

It is clear that the failure of a plaintiff to follow an adequate warning will ordinarily immunize the defendant *233 from liability. … On questions such as these, a jury is best qualified to speak. [Dillord and Hart, "Product Liabilty: Directions for Use and the Duty to Warn," 41 Va. L.

Hoag v. Brown

397 N.J. Super. 34 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 2007

The statutory limitation must be read in light of the general legislative intent in the TCA to establish immunity as the general rule and liability as the exception. Brooks v. … Overeem, 171 N.J. 46, 53 , 791 A. 2d 1002 (2002)); Kahrar, supra, 171 N.J. at 12, 791 A. 2d 197 (plaintiff qualifies for noneconomic damages under TCA as long as he can establish an objective permanent injury and permanent

FEHL v. BOROUGH OF WALLINGTON

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 30, 2021

Qualified immunity, on the other hand, provides for immunity to suit. Lozano v. New Jersey, 9 F.4th 239, 244 (3d Cir. 2021). … See also Lozano, 9 F.4th at 245 (“A police officer is entitled to qualified immunity under § 1983 unless the plaintiff shows that the officer violated ‘clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable

SABRINA LOSADA VS. PRINCETON UNIVERSITY (L-0057-14, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 24, 2017

Additionally, Princeton qualifies as a public charity under IRC § 170(c). … to fulfill its qualifying purpose.

In re the Adoption of the Monroe Township Housing Element

442 N.J. Super. 565 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 26, 2015

Clearly, since the time of the 2008 amendments to the FHA, COAH gradually ceased to operate. … The Township was granted an initial five-month period of immunity from all exclusionary zoning actions pending the court's adjudication of the Township's compliance, and Fair Share Housing Center, Inc.

PRATT v. ANN KLEIN FORENSIC CENTER

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 25, 2019

“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 constitutional … If the court concludes that the defendant’s conduct did violate a clearly established constitutional or statutory right, then it must deny the defendant the protection afforded by qualified immunity.

State v. Collectors of East

26 N.J.L. 519 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Nov 15, 1857

The difficulty in the application of this privilege t.0 the corporate immunities of the plaintiffs, as land-holders, arises from a difference of opinion as to the scope of the exemption ; whether it extends to every species … The case before us comes directly within the principle established in that case.

Lina M. Ramirez v. Care One LLC

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 25, 2024

The Immunity Statute provides: (a) The Legislature finds and declares: This statement of legislative intent is made to establish clearly our intent because of the lack of committee … This statement shall be made an official part of the record in establishing this Legislature's intent.

Carbone v. Warburton

11 N.J. 418 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 9, 1953

It may equally be established from evidence of the witness’s observations of the things done by fellow practitioners or of the witness’s reading and study of treatises and medical journals upon the subject. … We think the trial judge was clearly right. The subject of Dr.

Kantakevich v. Delaware, Lackawanna & Western Railroad

18 N.J. Misc. 77 · Hudson County Circuit Court, N.J. · Jan 19, 1940

It is conceded in this case and clearly established by decisions of our appellate courts that the cause sub judice is a transitory action. Hale v. Lawrence, 21 N. J. L. 714; Ackerson v. … The “privileges and immunities” clause of the Constitution of the United States is no longer an impediment on this point since the decision in Douglas v. New York, New Haven and Hartford Railroad, 279 U. S. 377 .