Case law

Rutgers v. Piluso

113 N.J. Super. 65 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 11, 1971

That result would be contrary to the expressed intent to establish Rutgers as the State's instrumentality to operate the State University. In Aviation Services v. … Supporting the presumption of immunity are the provisions of the 1956 act.

Perona v. Township of Mullica

270 N.J. Super. 19 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 14, 1994

Even when one of the Act's provisions establishes liability, that liability is ordinarily negated if the public entity possesses a corresponding immunity." Id. at 408 , 541 A. 2d 1029 (quoting Kolitch v. … And that being so, I believe that the officers, in their determination, enjoy an absolute, as oppose to a qualified type of immunity with respect to this.

Levin v. Devoe

221 N.J. Super. 61 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 30, 1987

immunities. … Super. 393, 400 (App.Div. 1987), that Stewart establishes an absolute municipal immunity for deteriorated sidewalks.

Jama v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service

334 F. Supp. 2d 662 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 28, 2004

Esmor guard Irving Brown moved for summary judgment and moved for leave to file an amended answer to assert the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … All individual Defendants will be deemed to have amended their answers to assert the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. i.Decision on all other pending motions in Jama will continue to be reserved.

Stone v. Police Department of Keyport

191 N.J. Super. 554 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 3, 1983

Plaintiff made the statement in a criminal proceeding to establish a factual basis for his guilty plea to an assault charge arising out of this incident. … We have carefully considered plaintiff’s remaining points and find that they are clearly without merit. R. 2:ll-3(e)(l)(E). Affirmed.

City of Newark v. United States

149 F. Supp. 917 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 5, 1957

Both drivers were thus- clearly negligent. … The negligence of the mail truclc driver, imputable without question to hi* employer, the United States, clearly establishes that judgment on the Government’s counterclaim must be entered for-the City.

In Re Ippolito

75 N.J. 435 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Feb 22, 1978

Such immunity was not granted although the SCI had statutory power to grant “use and fruits” immunity 2 from criminal prosecution or penalty. N. J. S. … The Appellate Division held that more must be established before a determination of self-incrimination can be made.

Wood v. City of Linden

218 N.J. Super. 11 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 26, 1987

We now reverse because plaintiff established a prima facie case. … Clearly, no evidence was presented to allow the jury to deliberate as to them.

Center for Molecular Medicine & Immunology v. Township of Belleville

19 N.J. Tax 342 · New Jersey Tax Court · May 2, 2001

in the fashion the tax immunity was intended. … Thus, the GSCC is clearly operated in furtherance of a public purpose as specified by N.J.S.A. 54:4-3.3.

Dairy Stores, Inc. v. Sentinel Publishing Co.

104 N.J. 125 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 21, 1986

Privileges may be “absolute,” which means that the statements are completely immune, or “qualified.” … C In traditional defamation analysis, one difference between absolute and qualified privileges is that an absolute privilege grants complete immunity to the publisher, but a qualified privilege accords immunity only if the

Vak La v. Hayducka

269 F. Supp. 2d 566 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 24, 2003

Qualified Immunity Government officials are entitled to qualified immunity from civil suits for damages arising out of the performance of their official duties, as long as their actions could reasonably be considered consistent … The key inquiry in analyzing a claim of qualified immunity is whether defendants’ alleged conduct violated clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a reasonable person would have known.

In re Gabapentin Patent Litigation

214 F.R.D. 178 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 26, 2003

Attorney Work Product The work product doctrine provides qualified immunity from discovery to materials prepared by an attorney (or his agent) in anticipation of litigation or for use at trial. … Warner Lambert has failed to establish the elements as to these documents.

Jordan v. Horsemen's Benevolent & Protective Ass'n

90 N.J. 422 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 27, 1982

No other “programs designed to aid the horsemen” receive money under the statutory provisions, and no statute or regulation indicates how such programs might qualify for funding if established. … Furthermore, given the structure of the statutory system, NJHBPA clearly enjoys certain advantages.

Jama v. United States Immigration & Naturalization Service

343 F. Supp. 2d 338 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 10, 2004

Esmor guard Irving Brown moved for summary judgment and moved for leave to file an amended answer to assert the affirmative defense of qualified immunity. … However, the defense of qualified immunity is not available to the Esmor guards, because they are not executive officials. Richardson v.

Velez v. City of Jersey City

180 N.J. 284 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 29, 2004

If proven, [defendant’s] actions would qualify as the type of outrageous conduct sought to be excluded from the protections of the Act by N.J.S.A 59:3-14. … from suit under the ‘inspection’ immunities of the Act.”

Smith v. City of Newark

136 N.J. Super. 107 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 30, 1975

IV, § 7, par. 9(8), in that it grants an individual an exclusive privilege and immunity; (4) N.J. Const. (1947), Art. … Such an intention must be clearly expressed in order to affect pending litigation. A & B Auto Stores of Jones St., Inc. v. Newark, 59 N.J. 5, 22 (1971); O'Neill v. Hoboken, 73 N.J.L. 189 (Sup.

Weymouth Township v. Memorial Park Family Practice Center, Inc.

7 N.J. Tax 589 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jul 19, 1985

The above-quoted laws clearly establish that all real property within the jurisdiction of this State is presumed to be taxable. … If, before us, the taxing district on its appeal has the burden of proof it would be required to establish the non-existence of facts by a preponderance of the evidence that the property owner does not qualify under each

Collins v. Union County Jail

150 N.J. 407 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 15, 1997

That statute establishes a rule of absolute immunity when the threshold requirement is not met for certain categories of injuries. … Clearly such an indifference does not exist, as evidenced by legislation defining personal injury so as to include psychological harm.

Foldi v. Jeffries

93 N.J. 533 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 13, 1983

Our decision in Small clearly reaffirmed our general disapproval of the parental immunity doctrine in France : The reasoning and tenor of Justice Proctor’s opinion in France ... leave no room for doubt that he and those who … And unlike an intentional tort, “wanton or willful misconduct does not require the establishment of a positive intent to injure.” Tabor v. O’Grady, 61 N.J.Super. 446, 451 (App.Div.1960).

CIVALIER BY CIVALIER v. Estate of Trancucci

138 N.J. 52 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Oct 20, 1994

Thus, because the Court qualified its ruling in Hoy by emphasizing the absence of reliance by either driver, the codification of Hoy does not automatically bar suit against the public bodies in this case. B. … Whereas Weiss concerned the initial implementation of the discretionary decision to place a traffic signal at a railroad crossing, for which N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 clearly immunizes public entities, see Kolitch, supra, 100 N.J.