Case law

Michael Shaw v. Town of Kearny

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 4, 2025

The trial court granted summary judgment to defendants and held that defendants were immune because their discretionary decisions fell within the statute providing qualified … immunity for the discretionary acts of public employees . . . .

New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission v. Power Motors, LLC

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 18, 2025

O'Connor explained the 1 Only businesses established before March 6, 2006, qualified for an exemption from the MVC's firewall requirement under N.J.A.C. 13:21-15.4(d). … Because there was no evidence establishing a second business had operated at the 30 State Route 31 prior to March 6, 2006, the Administrator determined Applicants failed to qualify for an exemption from the firewall requirement

Mezey v. United Jersey Bank

254 N.J. Super. 19 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 30, 1992

Specifically, Purzycki qualified his opinion respecting UJB's first lien status, noting that it was subject to "such exceptions as have been approved by the Bank." … This policy is clearly established in the New Jersey Recording Act, see N.J.S.A. 46:21-1 and N.J.S.A. 46:22-1, and is equally applicable to the statutes dealing with notices of settlement.

Manufacturers Trust Co. v. Podvin

10 N.J. 199 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 26, 1952

Zingale held all of the outstanding stock of the corporation except two qualifying shares issued to his co-directors, Benjamin A. Rimm, an attorney, who organized the corporation, and Mr. Rimm’s secretary. … Plaintiffs were clearly entitled to have the personal money judgment include the $4,000 deposit paid in 1948.

ABADI v. MARINA DISTRICT DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC

District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 8, 2023

“[G]ood cause” requires “a particularized showing that disclosure will cause a clearly defined and serious injury to the party seeking closure[; t]he injury must be shown with specificity.” Id. … This Court’s Local Rule 5.3 establishes the procedure by which a litigant may move to seal a docket entry.

OM 309-311 6TH STREET, LLC v. THE CITY OF UNION CITY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 23, 2022

Board Members “Few doctrines were more solidly established at common law than the immunity of judges from liability for damages for acts committed within their judicial … Marotta also claims that he is protected by qualified immunity (id. at 30– 33), but I do not reach this issue because I find that the claims against him are covered by the litigation privilege.

State of New Jersey v. Ryan J. Rinker

446 N.J. Super. 347 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 29, 2016

To qualify under that exception, the statement "must have been made in furtherance of the conspiracy," "must have been made during the course of the conspiracy," and "there must be evidence, independent of the hearsay, of … The Byrd Court clearly prescribed the process by which otherwise inadmissible hearsay could be admitted under the new Rule.

In Re

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 1, 2017

As we explained in Silver, "[b]y its plain terms," the 2003 regulation "prescribe[d] a two-prong standard to establish misconduct." Id. at 53. … It is well-established that, when reviewing an 19 A-4636-14T3 agency's adoption of a regulation on appeal, the scope of review is "both narrow

VELASQUEZ v. SHARP

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 5, 2023

IFP Application Plaintiff qualifies for permission to proceed IFP. … Upon review, the Court finds that Plaintiff established that he lacks the financial ability to pay the filing fee.

EHRLICH v. ALVAREZ

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 4, 2021

The plaintiff generally has the burden of establishing that the court has subject matter jurisdiction. Lightfoot v. United States, 564 F.3d 625, 627 (3d Cir. 2009). … Clearly this allegation does not challenge the surrogate’s conduct as a judge, nor does it implicate quasi-judicial immunity. Russell v.

DEFENSE DISTRIBUTED v. GREWAL

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 29, 2023

defines the type of digital files and the methods of distribution that qualify as prohibited conduct. … Here, the Challenged Statute clearly does not discriminate against out-of-state corporations.

RHODES v. CAMDEN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 8, 2021

“To establish a claim for unequal terms and conditions in employment, or disparate treatment, [Plaintiff] must establish that she (1) is a member of a protected class; (2) was qualified … “To establish a prima facie case of retaliation under Title VII . . .

Terminal Const. Corp. v. Bergen, Etc., Authority

34 N.J. Super. 478 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 12, 1954

In dealing with this problem at the trial the contractor produced expert evidence to establish that the word "settlement" as used in the specifications had an established technical meaning in the engineering field. … But the record discloses clearly the basis for the controversy on this point, that Lincoln's superiors had established the engineer's position and that the Authority was well aware of the nature of the controversy.

Perini Corp. v. Greate Bay Hotel & Casino, Inc.

129 N.J. 479 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Aug 6, 1992

[completion of the [pjroject shall also be established.” … However, the testimony of Sands’s personnel clearly established that Sands intended to increase its profits by attracting more patrons from the boardwalk.

Newark Council No. 21 v. James

318 N.J. Super. 208 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 11, 1999

On the plaintiffs applications for a preliminary injunction, the Court said: This record clearly indicates the County’s official knowledge of violations of the residency requirement. … Each department head was directed to notify those identified employees who had not, as of that date, complied with the City residency ordinance that “they risk losing their job to a qualified Newark resident if they do not

WASHINGTON v. ARAMARK CORP.

District Court, D. New Jersey · Apr 19, 2023

§ 1915(e)(2)(B) and dismiss any claim which is frivolous, malicious, fails to state a claim for relief, or seeks relief from an immune defendant. … Plaintiff's allegations fail to set forth so much as negligence or malpractice, and thus fail to establish a basis for relief in a federal civil rights action.

WALSTEIN

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

Defendants, additionally, aver that the individual capacity claims asserted against Schuler should be dismissed because he is entitled to qualified immunity. (/d. at 32-33.) … > For the reasons discussed herein, the Court will not reach the issue of qualified immunity. A. Section 1983 Section 1983 “provides a remedy for the violation of rights created by federal law.”

Town of Hammonton v. Civil Service Commission

82 N.J. Super. 64 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 3, 1964

(Emphasis added) *68 The Commission asserts that DeLaurentis acquired no tenure by virtue of his appointment and may now qualify for the position only by taking the necessary Civil Service examination and otherwise satisfying … As respondent's very informative brief indicates, local authorities may tend to view the advent of Civil Service as a threat *71 to the established order.

United States Ex Rel. United States Department of Health & Human Services v. Marchand (In Re Southwest Citizens' Organization for Poverty Elimination)

91 B.R. 278 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 12, 1988

[A]s Section 541(a)(1) clearly states, the estate is comprised of all legal or equitable interests of the debtor in property as of the commencement of the case. … the non-profit community service organization, stating: [A]ll the monies in the twelve Action accounts which Palmiter seeks to garnish are funds in which the United States has a property interest and which are therefore immune

Matter of Greenberg

155 N.J. 138 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 17, 1998

Although the federal indictment against Sears was dismissed after he was given transactional immunity in return for his testimony, the ethics charges against him stemmed from his participation in the delivery of a $200,000 … The tenor of such testimony clearly reflects their high esteem for Harry L.