Case law

Interstate Wrecking Co. v. Palisades Interstate Park Commission

103 N.J. Super. 394 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 2, 1968

It has long been established that a state instrumentality does have governmental immunity unless waived by the Legislature. Breen v. Mortgage Commission of State of New York, 285 N. Y. 425 , 35 N. E. 2d 25 (Ct. … This court concludes that the aforementioned immunity, as the result of the language cited, was clearly waived by legislative authority in authorizing the compact, and it appears to be the only construction as a matter of

CORRADI v. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD

District Court, D. New Jersey · Oct 28, 2020

Defendants assert that they are entitled to qualified immunity because the Fourth Amendment rights asserted by Plaintiff are not clearly established. … Leatherwood had shown a violation of his rights sufficient to satisfy the first qualified immunity prong, he would fail on the ‘clearly established’ prong.” Id. at 1121 (citing Pearson, 555 U.S. at 243–44).

KAPLON v. MORRIS TOWNSHIP POLICE DEPARTMENT

District Court, D. New Jersey · Mar 24, 2025

“An officer conducting a search is entitled to qualified immunity where clearly established law does not show that the search violated the Fourth Amendment.” Pearson v. Callahan, 555 U.S. 223, 243–44 (2009). … Because the evidence does not show that Defendants violated Plaintiff’s clearly established Fourth Amendment rights, qualified immunity defeats Plaintiff’s § 1983 and NJCRA claims. C.

Mallory v. Mallory

179 N.J. Super. 556 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 14, 1981

At such time as the taxpayer qualifies and elects to receive distribution from his account, the expected benefit derived will be the payment of taxes at a lower rate on the sums so received. *559 The Congress, in establishing … To protect the participants and their beneficiaries from the adverse claims of creditors was clearly one of Congress' stated intents. ERISA § 2(c), 29 U.S.C.A. § 1001 (c).

Bowers v. National Collegiate Athletic Ass'n

563 F. Supp. 2d 508 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 1, 2008

The Court is guided by the Court of Appeals’ most recent consideration of this case: We have clearly stated that the determination of whether a person was a “qualified individual with a disability” for the purposes of an … , because “[ajfter-acquired evidence, simply put, is not relevant in establishing liability.”

State in Interest of DH

153 N.J. Super. 490 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Nov 9, 1977

Satisfied by Fidelity's showing that it could not reasonably ascertain the juveniles' identity by way of customary investigatory procedures, the Juvenile and Domestic Relations Court judge entered an order affording Fidelity qualified … applying this "delicate" balancing here, we would in any event have concluded that the policy of confidentiality would not have been unwarrantedly impinged upon where the effect of non-intrusion would be the fortuitous immunization

Stigliano v. Connaught Laboratories, Inc.

140 N.J. 305 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · May 31, 1995

Plaintiffs also contend that defendants must qualify the treating doctors as experts before the doctors may testify about causation. … This testimony was clearly relevant and material. To bar- such testimony of the initial treating physicians would only serve to hinder the search for truth. [Id. at 592, 630 A.2d 355 .]

CLAY

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 14, 2026

immunity grounds because his conduct was objectively reasonable and he did not violate any clearly established right. … Plaintiffs respond that Officer Love is not entitled to qualified immunity because whether Officer Love’s actions were objectively reasonable must be decided by a jury, and Officer Love violated Plaintiffs’ clearly established

Borough of Paramus v. County of Bergen

1 N.J. Tax 126 · New Jersey Tax Court · Jun 12, 1980

This table concludes the county board’s administrative function and establishes, among other things, the amount of local taxes that must be raised in order to pay for the county budget. See N.J.S.A. 54:4-52. … N.J.S.A. 54:4-5, as a statute which permits a remission or rebate under certain circumstances, must be reviewed annually to determine whether the taxing district qualifies.

Braun v. Township of Mantua

270 N.J. Super. 404 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 30, 1993

Clearly the question of causality raises genuine issues of material fact which preclude summary judgment. R. 4:46. Judson v. … public entity, and thus, the immunity afforded by statute is not applicable to the factual setting of this litigation.

Carbone v. Warburton

22 N.J. Super. 5 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 6, 1952

And, of course, it has long been established that a person may qualify as an expert in this sense through actual experience or theoretical knowledge based upon special study of the subject. … App. 1939) the court said: "The law is established in California that in a malpractice case to qualify a physician as an expert it must be shown that the witness *20 possesses learning and knowledge of the subject under inquiry

MAZUR v. TOWNSHIP OF MARLBORO

District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 23, 2020

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.” … A district court “may not deny a summary judgment motion premised on qualified immunity without deciding that the right in question was clearly established at the time of the alleged wrongdoing.” Spady v.

Geraghty v. Berkeley Heights Tp.

259 N.J. Super. 350 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 19, 1990

Tax collectors collect taxes and if qualified are issued tax collector certificates by the Division of Local Finance. … It has long been established that a municipality may in appropriate circumstances abolish positions of public employment when no longer needed, when government is being reorganized, or when economies or greater efficiency

Yannicelli v. Nash

354 F. Supp. 143 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jan 24, 1973

Ill Under the rule of sovereign immunity, a suit against the United States is barred unless the United States specifically waives its immunity by statute and consents to be sued. Larson v. … Although the statute is only a grant of general jurisdiction, and not a waiver by the United States of its sovereign immunity, it does authorize proceedings in which the United States waives its immunity under some other

S.E.W. Friel Co. v. New Jersey Turnpike Authority

73 N.J. 107 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 20, 1977

On the other hand, the Turnpike Authority clearly fits under the definition of “Public entities”, namely as a public authority. … We are satisfied that the Turnpike Authority is clearly within the purview of the Act.

Major Tours, Inc. v. Colorel

720 F. Supp. 2d 587 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 22, 2010

Governmental Immunity Qualified immunity protects some government officials from some federal claims, and state common law and statutes protect some officials from some state claims. … A mistake is not reasonable when it amounts to the violation of a “clearly established” right, such that “it would be clear to a reasonable officer that his conduct was unlawful in the situation he confronted.”

State v. Ciba-Geigy Corp.

222 N.J. Super. 343 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jan 20, 1988

Paraphrasing what we understand to be the State's position, it argues that the trial judge erred in dismissing the indictment because the State had fully complied with the guidelines established in State v. … Two of the defendants in the first indictment, Robert Fesen and David Ellis, have allegedly been granted immunity with respect to their testimony before that new grand jury.

D'EUSTACHIO v. Beverly

177 N.J. Super. 566 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Dec 12, 1979

Much later, when No. 1 and No. 2 had defaulted in this action, plaintiff, on oral proofs, established over $16,000 in damages for losses sustained. [3] On January 16, 1978 plaintiff's counsel wrote a detailed letter to the … Clearly, the Legislature did not bind itself to a fixed immunity-liability balance when it adopted the Tort Claims Act.

Smith v. Fireworks by Girone, Inc.

180 N.J. 199 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Jun 23, 2004

Therefore, in balancing the liability and immunity provisions of the TCA, “immunity is the rule and liability the exception.” Posey ex rel. Posey v. … Clearly, then, there is no support for the notion that Deptford became the title owner of the errant firework within the meaning of N.J.S.A . 59:4-1.

Otsuka Pharmaceutical Co. v. Torrent Pharmaceuticals Ltd.

118 F. Supp. 3d 646 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 22, 2015

Lehigh Valley Hosp., Inc., 184 F.3d 268 , 275 n. 1 (3d Cir.1999) (noting that, “protecting a competitor’s ability to compete” clearly rests within “the interest of competition”). … Moreover, even if Torrent ultimately overcomes Noerr-Pennington immunity, in order to *658 succeed on its Counterclaim, Torrent must still establish a substantive antitrust violation. See Organon Inc. v.