District Court for the District of New Jersey Court Cases

Search
  1. In Re the Prudential Ins. Co. of America (1997)

    The Prudential Insurance Company of America, the institution that for years has represented itself as the quintessence of stability, the Rock, used pervasive and systematic deceptive sales tactics to sell many individuals a great number of life insurance policies, to the benefit of Prudential and its sales agents, but to the detriment of trusting consumers. The old adage resounds true: insurance is not bought; it is sold. And through selling consumers "a piece of the rock," Prudential [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: MDL 1061. Civil Action No. 95-4704
  2. Malkin v. United States (1998)

    This case arises out of Harriet Malkin's ("plaintiff") challenge of the Internal Revenue Service's ("IRS") assessment of income taxes and penalties against her. The United States moves the Court to dismiss the case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The Court has decided this case without oral argument.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: CIV. A. 95-6522
  3. In Re K-Dur Antitrust Litigation (2004)

    John W. Nields, Jr., Esq., Alan M. Wiseman, Esq., Howrey, Simon, Arnold & White, LLP, Washington, DC, William E. Goydan, Esq., Wolff & Samson, West Orange, NJ, William J. O'Shaughnessy, Esq., Harvey C. Kaish, Esq., McCarter & English, LLP, Newark, NJ, for Defendant Schering-Plough Corporation.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: CIV.A. 01-1652(JAG) MDL No. 1419
  4. Cammer v. Bloom (1989)

    Peter S. Pearlman, Cohn & Lifland, Saddle Brook, N.J., and David J. Bershad, Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Specthrie & Lerach, and Stephen T. Rodd, Abbey & Ellis, New York City, for plaintiffs.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 88-2458
  5. Iwanowa v. Ford Motor Co. (1999)

    Allyn Z. Lite, Joseph J. DePalma, Lite, DePalma, Greenberg & Rivas, LLC, Newark, New Jersey, Melvin I. Weiss, Deborah Sturman, Milberg, Weiss, Bershad, Hynes & Lerach, LLP, New York City, Michael D. Hausfeld, Cohen, Milstein, Hausfeld & Toll, P.L.L.C., Washington, D.C., Burt Neuborne, New York City, for plaintiffs.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ.A. 98-959 JAG
  6. Japan Gas Lighter Association v. Ronson Corp. (1966)

    Carpenter, Bennett & Morrissey, by Stanley Weiss, Newark, N. J., for plaintiffs; Stitt & Hemmendinger, Washington, D. C., by Noel Hemmendinger, Washington, D. C., Semmes & Semmes, Washington, D. C., by David H. Semmes, of counsel.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 721-65
  7. United States v. Price (1981)

    For fundamental and deeply rooted psychological reasons, as well as more mundane utilitarian considerations, it is characteristic of man to bury that which he fears and wishes to rid himself of. In the past, this engrained pattern of behavior has generally proven harmless and, indeed, has often led man to restore to the earth the substances he had removed from it. In today's industrialized society, however, the routine practice of burying highly toxic chemical wastes has resulted in serious [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 80-4104
  8. Baron & Budd, PC v. Unsecured Asbestos (2005)

    Bruce Hugh Levitt, Levitt & Slafkes, PC, South Orange, NJ, for Appellants Baron & Budd, P.C., Foster & Sear, L.L.P., McCurdy & McCurdy, L.L.P., Motley Rice, L.L.C., Provost & Umphrey, L.L.P., Brayton Purcell, and Silber Pearlman, L.L.P.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. Nos. 04-5633(SRC) to 04-5636(SRC)
  9. Marrero v. Camden County Bd. of Social Services (2001)

    Marshall, Dennehey, Warner, Coleman & Goggin by Richard L. Goldstein, Cherry Hill, NJ, for Defendants Camden County Board of Social Services, Clement Carney, Robert Ellis and Sandra Mayers.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: CIV. A. 00-3233(JEI)
  10. Gutman v. Howard Sav. Bank (1990)

    Defendants have moved pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 9(b) to dismiss plaintiffs' fraud claim against defendants on the grounds that plaintiffs' averments of fraud are not sufficiently specific. Defendants move in the alternative under Rule 12(e) for a more definite statement of these averments.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 89-5131 (Formerly Civ. A. No. 90-2397)
  11. Perez v. Cucci (1989)

    The issue in this case, following a fifteen day bench trial, is whether the civil rights of plaintiff, Abad Perez, a former Jersey City Police Officer, were violated when he was demoted from the rank of plainclothes detective to uniformed patrolman because he had openly espoused the candidacy of a mayoral incumbent who was defeated in his bid for reelection in 1985.[1]


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 86-3595
  12. Oxford House, Inc. v. Township of Cherry Hill (1992)

    Plaintiffs are a group home for recovering drug addicts and alcoholics and its residents. They seek a preliminary injunction from this court preventing the Township of Cherry Hill from interfering with their rental and occupancy of a house located in a single family residential zone in Cherry Hill. The complaint and an application for a temporary restraining order were filed on March 20, 1992, after the Township refused to issue plaintiffs a Certificate of Occupancy ("C.O.") on the grounds that [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. No. 92-1150
  13. Capua v. City of Plainfield (1986)

    In the face of widespread use of drugs and its intrusion into the workplace, it is tempting to turn to mass testing as a solution. The issue presented by this case is the constitutionality of such testing of current employees by governmental entities. Whether such testing may be done in the private sector or be imposed as a condition of accepting employment, even in the public sector, is not here presented. Government has a vital interest in making certain that its employees, particularly [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 86-2992
  14. Hutchinson v. Delaware Sav. Bank FSB (2006)

    Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP, by Meredith B. Trzcinski, Princeton, NJ, for Defendants Delaware Savings Bank FSB, Aurora Loan Servicing, Inc., and Mortgage Electronic Registration Systems, Inc.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civil Action No. 04-4809 (JEI)
  15. Bishop v. General Motors Corp. (1996)

    Plaintiff Peter Bishop moves to remand his complaint to the state court from which it was removed by defendant General Motors. Because we hold that Bishop's claim does not meet the amount in controversy required to establish federal subject matter jurisdiction, and because we decline to treat attorneys' fees or highly speculative punitive damages as aggregable for purposes of meeting the amount in controversy, plaintiff's motion to remand will be granted.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civil No. 95-04794
  16. Chatlos Systems v. National Cash Register Corp. (1979)

    This case was tried before the Court sitting without a jury during May and June of 1979. The action arises out of the sale, through a leasing arrangement, of computer hardware and software. The plaintiff alleges breach of contract, breach of express and implied warranties, fraudulent misrepresentation, and seeks compensatory and punitive damages.[1] The parties have submitted extensive trial memoranda and proposed findings and conclusions. After careful consideration of all testimony, exhibits [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 77-2548
  17. Petrella v. NL Industries, Inc. (1982)

    This is a suit to recover pension and employee welfare benefits brought pursuant to the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 ("ERISA"), 29 U.S.C. ยง 1001 et seq. The fourteen plaintiffs are all former salaried employees of the Dutch Boy Paint Division ("Dutch Boy") of NL Industries ("NL") not covered by a collective bargaining agreement.[1] They allege that as a result of the sale of Dutch Boy to ELT, Inc. ("ELT") in December 1976, NL terminated their employment and wrongfully [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 80-2746
  18. Doe v. Borough of Barrington (1990)

    Presently before the court is the motion of plaintiffs Jane Doe and her children[1] for partial summary judgment against defendants Borough of Runnemede ("Runnemede") and Officer Smith. These defendants have cross-moved for summary judgment. This case presents novel issues concerning the privacy rights of individuals who have contracted Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome ("AIDS") and the privacy rights of their family members. For the reasons stated in this opinion, plaintiffs' motion for [...]

    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. A. No. 88-2642 (SSB)
  19. In Re Cendant Corporation PRIDES Litigation (1999)

    Carl Greenberg, Michael Rosenbaum, Budd Larner Gross Rosenbaum Greenberg & Sade, P.C., Short Hills, NJ, Samuel Kadet, Skadden, Aarps, Slate Meagher & Flom LLP, New York City, for Cendant Corporation and Cendant Capital I.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. No. 98-2819 WHW
  20. Zucker v. Quasha (1995)

    Whitman Breed Abbott & Morgan by Stephen R. Lang, Eric M. Nelson, Andrew Muscato, John E. Tardera, Newark, NJ, for defendants Allan G. Quasha, Jack E. Rosenfeld, Ralph Destino, J. David Hackman, S. Lee Kling, Theodore H. Kruttschnitt, Jeffrey Laikind, Elizabeth Valk Long, Edmund R. Manwell, Geraldine Stutz, Robert F. Wright, Wayne P. Garten, Hanover Direct Inc., Sun Life Ins. Co. of America.


    Court: District Court for the District of New Jersey Docket: Civ. No. 94-4301 (WGB)

1 of 244 Page(s)

Page:
  1. 2
  2. 3
  3. 4
  4. 5