Case law

Pfizer Inc. v. Teva Pharmaceuticals USA, Inc.

461 F. Supp. 2d 271 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 9, 2006

He applied established economic principles to this data, and explained how it informed his ultimate conclusions. (Id.) Pfizer’s contention that Dr. … There, an opthamologist planned to testify regarding the competitive advantages accruing to pharmacoemulsification machines that incorporated the claimed invention, Occlusion Mode. 2 As is the case here, the doctor was clearly

DEJESUS v. DAVIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2024

Dejesus were able to make out an alleged constitutional violation, the Court finds it likely that Officer Davis would have a defense of qualified immunity. … Pinkston, 2020 WL 4251485, at *S (“The doctrine of qualified immunity protects government officials from liability for civil damages insofar as their conduct does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional

Masel v. Paramus Borough Council

180 N.J. Super. 32 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 22, 1981

[her successor] shall have qualified” pursuant to N.J.S.A. 40:87—15. … or which may be established by any such county board of taxation.

ALLEN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 2026

Defendants contend that they “are immune from suit under the doctrine of sovereign immunity.” (Defs.’ Second Moving Br. 9.) … Moreover, “[a] public entity may net administer a licensing . .. program in a manner that subjects qualified individuals with disabilities to discrimination on the basis of disability” or “establish requirements for the

Vaughn v. Hankinson's Administrator

35 N.J.L. 79 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 15, 1871

Hankinson was duly qualified to practice medicine in this state. Unless thus qualified, every act which goes to make up the charge of this bill was a violation of law. … I think these citations will clearly show that the doctrine is quite established that a naked payment on an open account consisting of a number of items, which, it does not appear, have before been brought to the notice of

Donovan v. Bergen County Board of Chosen Freeholders

436 N.J. Super. 91 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 27, 2012

Judge Feinberg found that these statutory provisions “establish a clear and specific legislative intent to vest with the County Executive the authority to appoint the registered municipal ac *100 countant.” … Clearly, the Board’s attempts to analogize the appointment of the municipal accountant to the state auditor are misplaced.

Waldron v. Johnson

368 N.J. Super. 348 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 23, 2004

Through her expert's testimony, plaintiff established to the jury's satisfaction that the *1290 Mall's response time was slow and that, overall, its security was lax or deficient; but plaintiff's injury was no more foreseeable … The contingent fee of an attorney shall not be computed on the interest so included in the judgment." [5] That circumstance is clearly distinguishable from a situation in which no such immunity had been granted by statute

CHARLES KRAVITZ VS. PHILIP D. MURPHY (L-0774-20, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 20, 2021

A-1584-20 7  Importantly, the Governor qualified the reach of EO 106 in two ways. … In their reply brief, appellants state they do not qualify for the SLEG, because, apparently, they own less than three rental units.

State v. Jule Hannah

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 16, 2026

The State initially sought to qualify Detective Leyman as an expert in historical cell site analysis. The prosecutor noted, “I have to qualify him as an expert in order for this testimony to come in.” … The trial judge responded that, while cell phone tower data alone does not establish location, it may do so in conjunction with other evidence.

BAYER HEALTHCARE LLC v. SECOND STONE ENTERPRISES LLC

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

In other words, a lawsuit “does not qualify for... immunity if it ‘is a mere sham to cover... . an attempt to interfere directly with the business relationships of a competitor.’” Pro. Real Est. Invs., Inc. v. … See Hanover, 806 F.3d at 180 (explaining that there is no minimum number of cases to qualify as a pattern or series when determining what constitutes “sham litigation,” but four could qualify as “a series of filings”)

Transtech Industries, Inc. v. a & Z SEPTIC CLEAN

798 F. Supp. 1079 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 30, 1992

These actions by plaintiff clearly are the result of civil actions by the government. … Only complaints that clearly violate this standard should be stricken.

In Re Cendant Corp. Securities Litigation

109 F. Supp. 2d 285 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 16, 2000

and had not submitted the lowest qualified bid, it would be given the opportunity to agree to the terms of what the Court had found to be the lowest qualified bid. … Lead Counsel assert that the 8.275% request “adheres precisely to the market-established fee grid, which the Court de *289 termined was the lowest qualified bid.”

State v. Farinella

150 N.J. Super. 61 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 4, 1977

with representatives of the Attorney General's office and ultimately entered into an agreement whereby his corporation, Albert Scaletti, Inc., would plead guilty to a charge against it and Scaletti would be given personal immunity … A conspiracy is presumed to have continued as to each member of it until either the object of the conspiracy has been established or there is proof of an affirmative act of withdrawal as to one or more members thereof.

Mega Care, Inc. v. Union Township

15 N.J. Tax 566 · New Jersey Tax Court · Feb 1, 1996

Community Hospital Linen Services allows tax exemption for property of nonprofit corporations established to provide laundry, collection and printing services to several hospitals. … It is contended that Mega Care's by-laws specifically reflect integrated operation with a hospital; but the applicable portions of the by-laws are not clearly found in the moving papers, and the requirement of incorporation

Larocco v. Gardella

352 N.J. Super. 234 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 31, 2002

Nevertheless, the conclusion therein, which established venue in the Family Part, was the result of the underlying domestic arrangement of the parties, which clearly comported with the requirements necessary to establish … Unless the Plaintiff can establish cohabitation with the Defendant, he does not present a principal claim which qualifies as a “family-type” relationship.

In re January 11, 2013 Subpoena by the Grand Jury

432 N.J. Super. 570 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 12, 2013

news process, nor had she demonstrated an established connection with any news entity. … Again, the State argues her surreptitious methods are clearly in direct contrast to the requirement that her information was obtained as a part of professional newsgathering.

Shepley v. Johns-Manville Products Corp.

141 N.J. Super. 387 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 11, 1976

Irving Berney, a qualified otolaryngologist, testified that he examined petitioner on December 19, 1972. … The evidence clearly supports the thesis that the total permanent disability found by the court had a causal connection with the prior condition which produced the award of 12 1/2% partial permanent disability.

Merrimack Mutual Fire Insurance v. Coppola

299 N.J. Super. 219 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 31, 1997

Indeed, the Court held: “Absent exceptional circumstances that objectively establish the insured’s intent to injure, we will look to the insured’s subjective intent to determine intent to injure.” … Nor, moreover, do any of the common-law reasons for interspousal immunity pertain to intentional torts ... Insurance coverage for such torts not being available as a matter of public policy, see, e.g., Malanga v.

Cointreau, Ltd. v. BD. OF REVIEW, DEPT. OF LABOR AND INDUSTRY

171 N.J. Super. 407 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 1979

This provision must be included in all federally-qualified state unemployment compensation plans. See 26 U.S.C.A. § 3304 (a)(5)(A). … But the statute just as clearly manifests an intent that unemployed workers need not be turned into strike breakers, or suffer a denial of benefits. The claimants had been laid off indefinitely on March 30.

Interstate 78 Office Park, Ltd. v. Tewksbury Township

11 N.J. Tax 172 · New Jersey Tax Court · Apr 26, 1990

, the taxpayers cannot now be permitted to attempt to establish a totally different qualification; to wit: the breeding and sale of horses. … The fact that the assessor is directed to notify the owner of a denial by November 1 of the pretax year clearly manifests that the assessor must make his examination and determination and, if denied, the reasons therefor