Case law

1711 Third Avenue, Inc. v. City of Asbury Park

16 N.J. Tax 174 · New Jersey Tax Court · Oct 16, 1996

On the other hand, there is sufficient other evidence in the record to establish that the residents are mentally ill. … Quite clearly, the subject property could not qualify under section 811 unless it housed persons with the described disabilities, and chronic mental illness is a specifically included type of disability. *180 The fact that

United States v. Pelullo

917 F. Supp. 1065 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 18, 1995

The government argues that even if it is established that Corona’s immunized testimony and information is used against him, such use is harmless. … A Kastigar hearing might well establish that during his interview with Special Agent Wood and AUSA O’Malley, Special Agent Ruffino received'and later used other immunized information.

Nl Industries, Inc. v. State(076550)

Supreme Court of New Jersey · Mar 27, 2017

A legislative waiver of sovereign immunity must be expressed clearly and unambiguously, and a retroactive waiver of sovereign immunity requires the clearest of expression. (pp. 20-23) 5. … In other words, a legislative waiver of sovereign immunity must be expressed clearly and unambiguously, Allen v.

Nuwave Investment Corp. v. Hyman Beck & Co.

432 N.J. Super. 539 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Sep 19, 2013

While a statement of opinion generally enjoys absolute immunity, a statement of fact is actionable [o]nly if the statement suggested specific factual assertions that could be proven true or false. … Clearly, such determination would be more appropriately made by the Court. See, e.g., Tannen v.

Bd. of Ed. Tp. N. Bergen v. N. Bergen Fed. Tchrs.

141 N.J. Super. 97 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 27, 1976

They are clearly irrelevant to the issue before us. … Such a provision clearly should be negotiable and arbitrable.

Behnke v. New Jersey Highway Authority

13 N.J. 14 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 25, 1953

While constitutional limitations are in their very nature inflexible in meaning and immune to varying public opinion, social and economic needs arising from the complexities of modern life call for new applications of the … The general provision is qualified by the particular.

State v. Dunns

266 N.J. Super. 349 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 7, 1993

1992, no matter when the immunity was obtained. … The witness in the case before us, Elliott, rather clearly indicated at the Evid.R. 8 hearing before trial that she would not testify for the State.

Tri-State Met. Naturists v. Lower Tp.

219 N.J. Super. 103 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 11, 1987

Having completed the inspection, it is this court's conclusion that the area can clearly be labeled as secluded. … The legislature has provided for the establishment of county park systems and governance under autonomous bodies in terms that clearly exclude the divisive control claimed by the municipality here.

State v. Dasean Harper (077427) (Salem and Statewide)

229 N.J. 228 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 5, 2017

That is not a declaration of blanket immunity. (pp. 10-11) 2. … That is not a declaration of blanket immunity.

Housing Authority v. Sagner

142 N.J. Super. 332 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jun 1, 1976

Its employees enjoy civil service status under guidelines established by the State. N. J. S. A. 55:14A-6.1. … In that case the National Housing Agency was held to be immune from the operation of a local zoning ordinance. That agency was clearly a federal one and not a state one. Leslie Miller, Inc. v. State of Arkansas, 352 U.

GRUSHACK v. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS

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

Qualified Immunity Stanzione, Adams, and Rozov argue that they are entitled to qualified immunity because Plaintiff fails to establish that they violated a clearly established … Therefore, “qualified immunity will be upheld on a 12(b)(6) motion only when the immunity is established on the face of the complaint.” Thomas v.

Millison v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co.

101 N.J. 161 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 10, 1985

II Under Rule 4:46-2 the court shall grant summary judgment if a discriminating search of the merits in the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits submitted on the motion, clearly shows … The pertinent statute, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, declares that when, by express or implied agreement, the parties have accepted the provisions of the Compensation Act and the employee qualifies for benefits under the conditions of

DORVAL v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, TREASURY DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 25, 2021

Qualified immunity shields officials from liability unless they violated clearly established rights. Williams v. City of York, 967 F.3d 252, 258 (3d Cir. 2020) (§ 1983); Morillo v. … It was clearly established that Detective Furda could not rely on such statements.

Hughes v. Lipscher

852 F. Supp. 293 · District Court, D. New Jersey · May 16, 1994

Clearly, given the holding of Consumers Union, if the sole basis for plaintiffs’ § 1983 action against defendants were the issuance of the aforementioned provisions, legislative immunity would foreclose recovery of attorneys … Although Gutierrez, as a result of its subsequent history, is clearly devoid of any preclusive effect such that present reliance on it in the legislative immunity context would be injudicious, see Garcia v.

Medford v. Duggan

323 N.J. Super. 127 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 9, 1999

Defense counsel refused to supply a copy of the statement contending it was "clearly privileged work-product". … Here, unlike Payton , the investigation was undertaken after suit was commenced and clearly was in anticipation of litigation.

Marshall v. Klebanov

188 N.J. 23 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jul 26, 2006

The dissent argued that the language of the statute clearly and unambiguously applies to plaintiff's situation, thereby abrogating the common law and precluding liability. … Because the trial court never ruled on whether plaintiff alleged sufficient evidence under the common law to establish *883 such claims, we remand this matter to the trial court for further proceedings. V.

Matter of Kent

190 B.R. 196 · United States Bankruptcy Court, D. New Jersey · Dec 5, 1995

That a motor vehicle surcharge constitutes a debt, rather than “an additional insurance premium”, has been clearly established. Lugo v. … The JUA was established as a non-profit organization. N.J.S.A. 17:30E^4.

DALAL v. MOLINELLI

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

, rather, is entitled to qualified immunity. … right, and (2) that the right was ‘clearly established’ at the time of the challenged conduct.”

Henschke v. Borough of Clayton

251 N.J. Super. 393 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 7, 1991

Rather the approach should be whether an immunity applies and if not should liability attach. … Even when one of the act's provisions establishes liability, that liability is ordinarily negated if the public entity possesses a corresponding immunity. See Malloy v. State, 76 N.J. 515, 519 , 388 A. 2d 622 (1978).

Pinckney v. City of Jersey

140 N.J. Super. 96 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 30, 1976

The basic approach taken by the Legislature was to reestablish sovereign immunity 1 and at the same time grant waiver of that immunity under circumstances and in accordance with conditions set forth in the Act. 2 In establishing … It is a firmly established rule in American jurisprudence that acts in derogation of sovereign immunity are to be strictly construed and that provisions which are conditions which the sovereign attaches to the waiver of immunity