Case law

Van Dunk v. Reckson Associates

415 N.J. Super. 490 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Aug 30, 2010

The issue of what qualifies as an "intentional wrong" under the statute was first addressed by our Supreme Court in Millison, supra, 101 N.J. at 177-80 , 501 A. 2d 505 . … The Court therefore adopted a two-prong test that had to be satisfied in order to establish that an employer has lost its immunity under the statute: "(1) the employer must know that his actions are substantially certain

LOVE

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

Qualified immunity shields police officers from liability unless they violated clearly established rights. … “Qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.” Leveto v.

Lipman v. Rutgers-State Univ. of NJ

329 N.J. Super. 433 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 4, 2000

Discovery also revealed that Lipman's New Jersey bank accounts were both established by his father when Lipman was a child. The only bank account established solely in Lipman's name was in Philadelphia. … Rutgers has also been deemed immune from local real property taxation. Rutgers v. Piscataway Township, 1 N.J.Tax 164 (Tax 1980).

Caporossi v. Atlantic City, New Jersey

220 F. Supp. 508 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 7, 1963

Town of Coca Beach, 96 So.2d 130 , 60 A.L.R.2d 1193 (Fla.Sup.Ct.1957), the court swept aside the basic immunity rule and established the principle of vicarious liability for both active and passive negligence under the doctrine … Clearly this is what the jury has endeavored to do; and it is this, nothing more or less, that this Court believes it has done.

Schweikart v. Sandy Hook Reservation Authority

92 N.J. Super. 508 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 14, 1966

The act created and established in the State Department of Conservation and Economic Development a body corporate and politic, to be known as the Sandy Hook Reservation Authority, which was to acquire, construct, develop, … Clearly, the Department’s operation of the park is the alternative to operation by the Authority contemplated when the Legislature included N. J. 8. A. 13 :15 — 16 in the Sandy Hook Reservation Authority Act.

DeGroot v. Muccio

115 N.J. Super. 15 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 17, 1971

Although insisting that the amended complaint fails to state a claim for which relief can be granted, they contend that even if there is such a statement, they are immune "because the said alleged acts were not done clearly … According to defendants, it happens when the prosecutors' acts "are clearly outside their jurisdiction"; plaintiffs argue that immunity is gone at the point where what the prosecutor does is not "an integral part of his job

McIntosh v. De Filippo

281 N.J. Super. 171 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 21, 1995

Our Workers' Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 34:15-1 et seq., establishes a no-fault compensation system for employees who are injured while working for their employer. … If they were, De Filippo would be immune from suit by virtue of the fellow-employee tort immunity provided by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, as the trial court found.

Coleman v. Edison Tp.

95 N.J. Super. 600 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 3, 1967

The municipality pleaded its statutory immunity under R.S. 40:9-2 as a complete defense. … (Italics ours) The words "in connection therewith" clearly have reference to "public swimming pools."

Law v. Newark Bd. of Ed.

175 N.J. Super. 26 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 25, 1980

At the conclusion of trial the board renewed its motion, arguing that plaintiffs had failed to establish a standard of conduct by which the action of the board's employees were to be evaluated and that the board is immune … The record in this case clearly establishes that defendant board is not immune from liability by virtue of N.J.S.A. 59:3-11.

Passaic County Bar Ass'n v. Hughes

108 N.J. Super. 161 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 22, 1969

The Governor, after exhaustive consultation and careful consideration, *172 sends to the Senate the name of the individual he deems most qualified by temperament and professional ability to occupy that judgeship. … In asserting and exercising its right to review, the court did no more than establish the exclusive nature of the particular qualifications for membership in the House that the Constitution enumerated.

Behring International, Inc. v. Imperial Iranian Air Force

475 F. Supp. 396 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Aug 13, 1979

In enacting the Act, Congress clearly considered each of these four categories and expressed its intentions with regard to each of them. … That history shows quite clearly that Congress intended the Immunities Act to govern notwithstanding the savings clause of sections 1604 and 1609 whenever an international agreement was silent upon an issue which the Act

MILLER v. LANIGAN

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 1, 2019

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … “The second prong of the qualified-immunity analysis asks whether the right in question was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the violation.” Tolan, 572 U.S. at 656 (internal citation and quotation marks omitted).

Knesz v. Central Jersey Bank and Trust Co. of Freehold

97 N.J. 1 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 20, 1984

Consequently, the bank cannot *10 qualify for the immunity provided for § 3-419(3) since it has not achieved representative or agent status. … That immunity may be lost, however, under certain circumstances.

Park v. Tsiavos

165 F. Supp. 3d 191 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Feb 29, 2016

The Church’s motion for summary judgment is GRANTED because it is immune from suit under New Jersey’s Charitable Immunity Act. … The Legislature has instructed that the definition of a “beneficiary” should be “liberally construed so as to afford immunity to a qualifying entity ‘in furtherance of the public policy for the protection of [such entities

Ali v. Person

904 F. Supp. 375 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Nov 15, 1995

Person has not raised the most clearly dispositive ground for dismissing these claims against him, which is his absolute immunity as a witness in a judicial proceeding from subsequent damages claims arising out of his testimony … Horowitz, 535 F.2d 830 (3d Cir.1976), established that witnesses appearing in federal court are entitled to absolute immunity from damages liability for their testimony at trial.

Cassidy v. Merin

244 N.J. Super. 466 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 27, 1990

The first two statements were held to be "facts" and therefore protected by a qualified privilege which could be overcome only by proof of "actual malice." Id. … In the trial court, defendant sought summary judgment for that claim on the basis of the immunity established by R. 1:20-11(b).

Rutigliano v. Valley Business Forms

929 F. Supp. 779 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 27, 1996

This testimony clearly demonstrates that Dr. Panitz moved from diagnosis to analysis, rather than from analysis to diagnosis. Dr. … This is called acquired immunity or adaptive immunity-" Dr. Panitz does not explain how this general principle of immunity supports her conclusion.

Borough of Englewood Cliffs v. Thomas J. Trautner

Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 7, 2025

Although the Eleventh Amendment pertains to state sovereign immunity in federal court, it is well-established that states enjoy sovereign immunity from suit in their own courts and may define the scope of that immunity. … in federal court, it is well-established that states enjoy sovereign immunity from suit in their own courts and may define the scope of that immunity.”

McDermott v. TENDUN CONSTRUCTORS, ROHR INDUSTRIES, INC.

211 N.J. Super. 196 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 17, 1986

With respect to Knight, we conclude that summary judgment grounded upon governmental immunity was properly denied since the record clearly indicates that this entity was fully responsible for planning and designing all aspects … Although Knight clearly was not entitled to summary judgment based upon governmental immunity, we find that the trial *208 court properly granted it summary judgment on the alternate ground that plaintiff had failed to make

KANSHAW v. DESANTIS

District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 5, 2019

“Qualified immunity shields government officials from civil damages liability unless the official violated a statutory or constitutional right that was clearly established at the time of the challenged conduct.” … In Brosseau, which involved an excessive force claim based upon a police shooting of a suspect fleeing by car, the Ninth Circuit denied qualified immunity because the officer had violated the clearly established rule that