Collection Summary

Creator: Bissell, John
Title: The Papers of John W. Bissell
Accession: MSS 05-1
Location: This collection is stored offsite. Please contact Special Collections before your visit to ensure your papers are available.
Photograph Collection: View 0 digitized photographs
Digitized Content: 0 objects

Collection Description & Arrangement

The Papers of Judge John W. Bissell document his service on the U.S. District Court for the district of New Jersey from 1983-2005. The collection consists mainly of unpublished opinions, touching on a great diversity of topics, with a few published opinions and articles of correspondence selected for preservation by Judge Bissell.

The papers are divided by date into 2,377 files. Each file has been assigned a number of subject terms from a modified subset of the Library of Congress CRS Legislative Subject Terms Used in THOMAS (including the CRS Named-Entity Subject Terms Used in THOMAS). A full list of subject terms used in describing the Bissell papersappears on the Law Library web site. You may use the search box on the left to search the full finding aid for subject terms of interest.

Opinions in this collection which have been published or reported in LEXIS are noted by the phrase "Published as:" and the relevant citation.

Researchers should note that a few published opinions, issued by Judge Bissell during the time period represented by the papers donated to the University of Virginia Law Library Special Collections, nevertheless do not appear in this collection. A list of published opinions not represented in this collection is available on the Law Library web site.

Brief summaries have been written for many, though not all, of the cases in the years 1983-1988. The full list of summaries is available on the Law Library web site.

Biographical & Historical Information

[Written by Audrey Golden, based on her own research and an interview with Judge Bissell that she conducted in July 2010.]

Retired Judge John Winslow Bissell presided over the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey from 1982-2005 after being nominated by then-President Reagan, and he served as Chief Judge from 2001 until the end of his tenure. Prior to serving as a federal judge, Bissell was employed in private practice from 1966-69 and 1972-78, first as an Associate and later as a Partner. He also acted as an Assistant United States Attorney in the District of New Jersey from 1969-71.

Bissell graduated from Phillips Exeter Academy in 1958 and went on to earn his B.A. from Princeton in 1962, followed by an L.L.B. from the University of Virginia School of Law in 1965. Subsequent to his retirement from the Court, he entered private practice at Connell Foley as Counsel, where he continues to serve both as Chair of the firm's Alternative Dispute Resolution Department and as a member of the Business Litigation practice group. Although Bissell considers his work in private practice to require expertise and skills distinct from those he honed as a federal judge, he has emphasized that his role as an adjudicator nonetheless provided for an efficient shift to his current function within arbitration and mediation processes. He has reflected particularly on the translatability of the skills of an adjudicator—hearing witnesses, reading evidence, drawing conclusion and explaining it in writing—to those of an arbitrator. The dynamic does shift vastly, however, between adjudicating, arbitrating, and mediating. Through arbitration and mediation, Bissell indicated that he has "polished a different set of techniques" from those sharpened through nearly twenty-five years on the bench.

The papers in this collection, representing decisions from the entirety of Bissell's tenure on the bench, provide significant insight into the workings of a busy urban federal court. Due to its inner-city setting in Newark, New Jersey, the Court decided a substantial number of cases involving antitrust and bank fraud issues, major drug prosecutions, and federal securities laws. Bissell's Court represents one of three federal trial courts in New Jersey, with the remaining two located in Trenton, the state's capital, and Camden. While the court's physical location may have impacted the types of cases adjudicated, as a federal judge Bissell ruled on cases in which the demography of vicinage was very diverse, encapsulating jurors, attorneys, and even parties to the actions from a wide range of urban, affluent suburban, and rural regions. Bissell noted that, while the courthouse was situated in a large-city locale, the district from which his cases arose stretched across the northern part of the state of New Jersey. As a result, jurors were pulled from city centers such as Newark and Jersey City, but also from many smaller rural towns along the Delaware River and out to Phillipsburg, as well as suburbs like Morristown in the very northern part of the state housing wealthy New York City-area commuters. Bissell reflected that his Court's jurors arrived from a relatively small geographic area, but an immensely varied demography. Similarly, Bissell's Court saw many attorneys from these representative areas, as well as those admitted pro hac vice from organizations and firms throughout the nation, appearing in the District of New Jersey on one-time bases for specific actions being tried. While attorneys hailed from a wide geographic distribution, the parties, too, originated from assorted locales, including those both national and international. In part, this range of parties was a result of their appearances within a federal trial court, as Bissell frequently heard diversity actions that otherwise would have been adjudicated within a state court. At the same time, however, the nature of the cases also led to the notable diversity of participants, as many of the commercial actions concerned business groups and companies throughout the United States and abroad.

Trends over time in the variety of cases contained within these papers likely are reflective of those nationally, displaying an increased number related to employment-law litigation, in particular employment-discrimination cases pertaining to race, age, and gender. Gradually more parties began to bring actions under Title VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act and the 1967 Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA), while the 1990 and 1993 passing of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA), respectively, also led to increased employment-discrimination litigation. Bissell reflected that this trend also impacted some of his later decisions as he became more sensitive to individual conduct, the thwarting of equal protection, and other discriminatory practices affecting society. These cases range from race, age, and gender discrimination in police departments and government agencies to those arising from a variety of large and small private-business actions. The papers in this collection showcase an increased number of cases concerning rights-based litigation, in general. In addition to discriminatory employment practices, in the later years of Bissell's tenure, a large number of decisions concerning employment benefits were litigated, which is reflected in the numerous cases to which the Social Security Administration was a named party.

The decision of which Bissell is most proud concerns 21st-century race discrimination in the workplace. In this 2005 case, Lomack v. City of Newark, the former judge affirmed a lower court decision to integrate firehouse shifts in a Newark fire department, a place of employment that was widely segregated as a product of de facto segregation. Although his decision later was reversed by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, Bissell noted of his contrary conclusion, "I feel very proud of this decision." At the same time, he noted how this case, in particular, reflects his own growing concern with civil rights issues in his later years on the bench. When asked whether he would have decided the same way if the case had come to him in 1983 instead of 2005, his "inkling was probably not."

While many of the cases in this collection remain unpublished, their significance for legal and historical research in future years is unmistakable. In addition to providing a historical record of general urban-court practices in the late 20th and early 21st centuries, Bissell hopes that these papers also will make clear the prevalence of judicial impartiality at the trial level and the significance of trial-court rulings generally, matters that frequently are not paid significant attention due to the academic and legal focus on appellate decisions and their inner-court workings. He has indicated that the social and political views of an individual judge should never hold a position in the adjudication process. The conscientious trial judge, Bissell noted, dedicates himself to deciding a case on its own merits both in terms of the facts involved and the law that applies; the role of a judge is not to ventilate or to inflict upon the parties involved a political, social, or sociological point of view. That has "no place there," Bissell indicated. He also reflected that his papers should produce for researchers both a sense of what it was like to be working as a federal trial court judge during this time span, along with the "products of a judge who, like almost all of them, calls them as he sees them without any baggage overlay." If his body of work helps to demonstrate these issues to both contemporary and future researchers, the now-retired judge indicated that he "would be very satisfied."

Acquisition Information

Date Received 2005
Donor Information The papers of Judge John Bissell were given to the Law Library on August 29th 2005 by Judge John Bissell.

Content List

Series 1: Papers, 1983
Boxes 1-2:
All papers dated 1983. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.   

Box 1:

  • Am. Home Prod. Corp. v. API Sys. 1983 April 08; Letter-Opinion; Stipulation and Order; Exhibits I, II, III; Decision (court transcript)
  • Ashford v. United States 1983 May 20; Letter-Opinion
  • Barlo Equip. Corp. v. Saddle River Tours 1983 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Bass River Assoc. v. Bass River Twp. 1983 September 16; Opinion; Order of Judgment; Appendices A & B; Published as: Bass River Assoc. v. Bass River Twp., 573 F. Supp. 205 (D. N.J. 1983).
  • Blieden v. Florescue 1983 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Blue v. U.S. Bureau of Alcohol 1983 February 14; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Cap Gemini Sogeti v. Applied Data Research, Inc. 1983 August 04; Letter; Order
  • Caravella v. Mayberry 1983 April 15; Opinion; Order
  • Carpet Masters v. Carpet Masters 1983 November 29; Opinion; Order of Remand; Letter-Opinion
  • Clauso v. Studds 1983 September 28; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Davila v. Tard 1983 July 15; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Devine v. Handy 1983 June 14; Letter-Opinion; Order; Opinion (1983 June 21); Order
  • Diecidue v. Whitesmiths 1983 May 18; Letter-Opinion
  • Esposito v. Mintz 1983 April 12; Letter-Opinion; Letter-Opinion (1983 May 02); Order
  • Fahey v. Carty 1983 May 20; Opinion; Order
  • Feist & Feist Realty Corp. v. Hansford Prop. 1983 May 04; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • First State Underwriters Agency of New England Reinsurance Corp. v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1983 September 28 Letter-Opinion; Opinion of 3rd Cir. on appeal (1986 January 07)
  • Fitzgerald v. Cmty. Mem'l Hosp. 1983 May 04; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Foca v. Econ. Lab. 1983 May 13; Opinion; Opinion (1983 September 01); Order
  • Gantt v. Western Union Tel. Co. 1983 January 26; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Gary v. Evans 1983 October 20; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Amendment to Letter-Opinion (1983 October 25)
  • Gilmore v. State 1983 July 11; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Gluck v. United States 1983 December 19; Opinion; Order
  • Gordon v. Gordon 1983 March 02; Opinion; Order
  • Hall v. Hicks 1983 June 27; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Hossic v. Mattingly 1983 March 02; Opinion
  • Hotz v. Brown 1983 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Hough v. Bendix Corp. 1983 February 09; Opinion-Letter; Order
  • Hunt v. Mercer County Super. Ct. 1983 December 08; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Opinion of 3rd Cir. for United States, ex rel. Rines v. Beister, et al. (1982 April 29)
  • James v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1983 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Johns-Manville Sales Corp. v. W. R. Grace & Co. 1983 November 15; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Kreuger Tech. v. Eco Recycling Serv. 1983 August 02; Letter-Opinion; Order of Remand
  • Lieberman v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co. 1983 March 08; Opinion; Order; Affidavit
  • McKinney v. Hercules 1983 June 20; Opinion (court transcript)
  • Monmouth Cablevision Assoc. v. Hastings 1983 July 15; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Moody v. Tard 1983 July 08; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Morris v. Hilton 1983 February 24; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1983 June 02); Order
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1983 February 10; Opinion-Letter; Order; Letter-Opinion (1983 April 13); Order; Opinion (1983 August 18); Order
  • Obi v. Mazza 1983 May 09; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Puchalski v. Tard 1983 April 04; Opinion; Order
  • Raywood v. Mercer County Bd. of Freeholders 1983 March 24; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 2:

  • Regulski v. Gale 1983 May 31; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Marine Midland Bank 1983 September 08; Opinion
  • Robert Morris Educ. Ass'n v. Bd. of Ed. of South Bound Brook 1983 December 15; Opinion; Order Granting Permanent Injunction; Judgment Granting Attorneys Fees and Court Costs
  • Rob-E-Son v. E. D. Etnyre & Co. 1983 May 02; Opinion
  • Rodziewicz v. Feconda 1983 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Rountree v. Fenton 1983 March 29; Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion (1983 August 09); Order
  • Sarullo v. Dumont 1983 October 20; Letter-Opinion
  • Sine v. Balogh 1983 May 19; Letter-Opinion
  • Sowa v. United States 1983 May 13; Opinion; Order for Declaratory Judgment Granting Jurisdiction; Published as: Sowa v. United States, No. 82-2721, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16999 (D. N.J. May 12, 1983).
  • Stanley v. White 1983 August 29; Opinion; Order
  • Stolzenthaler v. Auto-Life Mgmt. 1983 May 04; Letter-Opinion; Order Dismissing the Complaint
  • Thompson v. Dietz 1983 July 07; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Troche v. Vliet 1983 August 05; Letter-Opinion; Order; Opinion of 3rd Cir. for United States, ex rel. Rines v. Beister, et al. (1982 April 29
  • Tucker v. Fauver 1983 March 10; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1983 December 02)
  • Tucker v. Von Roll 1983 June 06; Opinion; Order
  • Ukarish v. Magnesium Elektron 1983 March 01; Oral Opinion (court transcript); Published as: Ukarish v. Magnesium Elektron, No. 81-638, 1983 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18909 (D. N.J. Mar. 1, 1983).
  • United States v. Curran 1983 July 12; Letter-Opinion
  • United States v. One 1980 Chevrolet Corvette 1983 May 26; Opinion; Judgment
  • United States v. Raymond 1983 January 26; Letter-Opinion; Letter-Opinion (1983 January 31)
  • United States v. Salconi 1983 November 04; Sentence (court transcript); Amended Order
  • United States v. Tremarco 1983 February 24; Letter (untitled)
  • Walker v. Steig 1983 September 12; Ruling of the Court (court transcript)
  • Washington v. Hilton 1983 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Tard 1983 September 28; Opinion; Order

Series 2: Papers, 1984
Boxes 2-4:

All papers dated 1984. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 2:

  • Ahart v. Ocean County Prosecutor's Office 1984 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Arizona Telco Fed. Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Soc'y 1984 September 04; Opinion; Order
  • Bass River Assoc. v. Bass River Twp. 1984 January 24; Opinion; Order
  • Bimbo v. Hilton 1984 January 24; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Bullock v. Stiles 1984 June 05; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Burnett v. Monmouth County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 1984 January 18; Opinion; Order
  • Callaway v. Callaway 1984 June 19; Opinion; Order
  • Chatman v. Pilgrim Life Ins. Co. 1984 November 02; Opinion
  • Clark v. N.J. Bell Local 827 1984 January 06; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Colon v. Brandt 1984 September 26; Opinion; Order
  • Cometa Trading Co. v. Manuel Int'l 1984 November 30; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1984 December 07; Letter-Opinion
  • Corsi v. Tard 1984 June 26; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Crane v. Fauver 1984 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Dick Carlisi Auto Body Corp. v. Steepy 1984 September 26; Opinion; Order for Summary Judgment; Letter from Sally Mrvos; Memorandum Opinion of the 3rd Cir. on appeal (1985 June 28)
  • Donovan v. Opatut 1984 February 01; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Evans v. Tard 1984 December 19; Opinion; Order
  • Fell v. Kapsak 1984 April 04; Letter-Opinion; Dismissal Order; Order
  • Fitzpatrick v. I.V. DiMartino 1984 February 01; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 3:

  • Foy v. Fauver 1984 September 28; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Foy v. Tard 1984 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Gluck v. United States 1984 April 04; Letter-Opinion; Order; Letter from Sally Mrvos; Opinion of 3rd Cir. on appeal (1985 February 12)
  • Golin v. FMC Corp. 1984 February 01; Letter-Opinion; Order Permitting Supplementary Amendment to Original Complaint
  • Han v. Food and Nutrition Serv. 1984 March 08; Opinion; Order; Errata Order; Addendum Order
  • Hinton v. Schroth 1984 June 25; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Hochman v. Zenith Radio Corp. 1984 July 03; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Holme v. United States 1984 November 28; Opinion; Order
  • Irizarry v. Level Line, Inc. 1984 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. Shibe 1984 September 04; Opinion; Order
  • Kovack v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1984 February 09; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • La Torre v. Fauver 1984 July 13; Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • La Torre v. Zelinski 1984 July 13; Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Laborers' Local Union Nos. 472 & 172 v. Agabiti Bros. 1984 January 24; Letter-Opinion; Order Confirming Arbitration Award
  • Laufgas v. Janes 1984 November 13; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order; Order
  • Lieberman v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co. 1984 November 02; Opinion
  • Luiz v. Heckler 1984 October 25; Opinion; Order of Remand
  • Macon v. Twp. of Old Bridge 1984 February 29; Opinion; Order
  • Martin v. Heckler 1984 October 11; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • McClintock v. Griffith 1984 April 17; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • McClintock v. Somerset County Prosecutor's Office 1984 April 19; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Miller v. Tard 1984 September 20; Opinion; Order for Summary Judgment
  • Monmouth Cablevision Assoc. v. Hastings 1984 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Moon v. Ross 1984 December 04; Letter-Opinion; Order Dismissing Plaintiff's Complaint
  • Mugmuk v. Klein 1984 October 05; Opinion; Order
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1984 February 09; Opinion; Order; Letter from Nancy B. Stiles; Letter (untitled); Order
  • N.Y. Coat, Suit, Dress, Rainwear v. Penny Fashions 1984 January 06; Opinion; Judgment
  • Pizzo v. Cosella 1984 June 12; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Ragins v. Super. Ct. 1984 February 01; Letter-Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Letter-Opinion for Hunt v. Mercer County Superior Court, et al. (1983 December 08); Opinion of 3rd Cir. for United States, ex rel. Rines v. Beister, et al. (1982 April 29)
  • Rago v. Breining 1984 October 30; Opinion; Judgment
  • Raleigh v. Rockwell Int'l Corp. 1984 January 24; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order for Leave to File an Amended Answer
  • Rasheed v. Cannon 1984 May 30; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Raynor v. United States 1984 October 29; Opinion; Order; Letter (untitled); Letter from Rosemary Peters; Published as: Raynor v. United States, 604 F. Supp. 205 (D. N.J. 1984).
  • Raywood v. Mercer County Bd. of Freeholders 1984 May 15; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Marine Midland Bank 1984 January 27; Opinion; Order
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1984 July 19; Opinion; Order
  • Ryans v. N.J. Comm'n for the Blind & Visually Impaired 1984 August 31; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Ryans v. Soc. Sec. Admin. 1984 May 04; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Saccenti v. Int'l Business Machines Corp. 1984 July 12; Opinion; Order; Published as: Saccenti v. Int'l Business Machines Corp., No. 83-4252, 1984 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14991 (D. N.J. July 12, 1984).
  • Segnit v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. 1984 January 27; Opinion; Order
  • Simcha Kosher Caterers v. Ins. Co. of N. America 1984 March 28; Opinion; Order
  • Simmons v. Tard 1984 January 27; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Slater v. Hannay 1984 June 06; Opinion; Order of Remand
  • Smith v. Amerada Hess Corp. 1984 April 05; Opinion; Order; Letter from John E. Flynn
  • Soto v. Lee Filters, Inc. 1984 February 01; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Stoklasek v. HAD Realty 1984 September 27; Letter; Order; Order of Dismissal; Exhibits A, A1, A2, B; Complain

Box 4:

  • Terrell v. Tard 1984 February 09; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order
  • Tucker v. Fauver 1984 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Tucker v. Tard 1984 September 07; Opinion; Order
  • Uhrin v. Maldonado 1984 February 01; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Artishenko 1984 June 08; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Cuthbertson 1984 June 29; Opinion upon Hearing Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255; Order; Letter from Sally Mrvos; Judgement Order of 3rd Cir. On appeal (1985 June 26)
  • United States v. Escarda 1984 June 18; Letter-Opinion
  • United States v. Garcia 1984 June 18; Letter-Opinion
  • United States v. Morton-Thiokol Corp. 1984 November 15; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Silva 1984 March 01; Letter-Opinion; Exhibit A; Order Amending Presentence Report
  • Series 3: Papers, 1985

Boxes 4-6:
All papers dated 1985. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 4:

  • Allen v. Alfacell Corp. 1985 September 13; Opinion; Order
  • Altamura v. News World Commc'n 1985 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Am. Centennial Ins. Co. v. Underwriters, Inc. 1985 November 14; Opinion
  • Am. Equip. Leasing Co. v. Tecchio 1985 February 12; Opinion
  • Baron v. McClure 1985 September 18; Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Battle v. County of Union 1985 August 22; Opinion; Order
  • Bennett v. Wiechnik 1985 August 22; Opinion (x2); Order; Order
  • Bertram Music Co. v. Park Vending 1985 February 04; Opinion; Judgment
  • Blohm v. Giordano 1985 March 15; Letter-Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion (1985 May 07); Order
  • Blohm v. Springfield Twp. Mun. Ct. 1985 May 07; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Blohm v. West Windsor Twp. 1985 May 14; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Boinides v. El Diario La Prensa 1985 July 03; Opinion; Affidavit of James Geehan; Order
  • Brown v. Foley 1985 June 20; Letter-Opinion; Order; Opinion of 3rd Cir. On appeal (1987 January 26)
  • Butler Mfg. Co. v. Kuhn & Jacob Molding & Tool Co. 1985 December 19; Opinion; Order
  • Caldwell v. Mobil Chem. Co. 1985 April 29; Opinion; Order; Letter from West Publishing Co. (with reply message from J. Bissell)
  • Callaway v. Callaway 1985 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • Cameron v. Corr. Inst. for Women 1985 February 01; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Carretta Trucking v. Underwriters at Lloyd's of London 1985 December 09
  • Cerwinski v. U.S. Dep't of Agric. 1985 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Christopher v. Keister 1985 November 13; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order
  • Claiborne v. Heckler 1985 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • Clauso v. Tard 1985 June 20; Letter (untitled); Order
  • Compolattaro v. O'Lone 1985 June 18; Letter-Opinion; Order; Report and Recommendation
  • Condone v. Reagan 1985 March 27; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Cruz v. Marine Transp. Lines 1985 March 27; Opinion (x2); Order (x2)
  • Cutler v. Morris 1985 January 21; Letter-Opinion; Report and Recommendation; Order
  • Davis v. Neubert 1985 October 16; Opinion; Order
  • Donaghy v. Roudebush 1985 February 19; Opinion; Hand-revised Opinion; Two Letters from West Publishing Co.; Letter to West Publishing Co.; Revised Opinion for Publication; Published as: Donaghy v. Roudebush, 614 F. Supp. 585 (D. N.J. 1985).
  • Doron v. F.W. Woolworth Co. 1985 May 13; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Dunmore v. Manning 1985 May 31; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Fasick v. Hilton 1985 February 05; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 5:

  • In re Feldman 1985 December 04; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • G. & J.K. Enter. v. City of South Amboy 1985 February 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1985 December 16); Order
  • Gamble v. City of Toms River 1985 April 04; Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • Hardgove v. Fauver 1985 June 21; Memo to Edna; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Harper v. Fauver 1985 March 21; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order
  • Hayes v. Kean 1985 October 10; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Huertas v. Marine Transp. Lines 1985 November 20; Opinion
  • Jabbar v. O'Lone 1985 September 11; Opinion; Order
  • Jenin v. Scheidemantel 1985 June 17; Letter-Opinion; Report and Recommendation of U.S.M. John W. Devine; Order
  • Jersey Paving Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. 1985 March 01; Opinion; Order Vacating Order of Consolidation; Order of Remand; Order of Remand; Order of Remand; Order; Erratum Order; Two Letters from James P. Corson; Letter to James P. Corson; Published as: Jersey Paving Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co., 603 F. Supp. 414 (D. N.J. 1985).
  • Lentz v. Mac Tools 1985 September 10; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Lidman v. Smith 1985 November 21; Opinion; Order
  • Lukas v. Nat'l Benefit Life Ins. Co. 1985 January 17; Opinion; Order Granting Defendant's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Claims for Punitive Damages and Emotional Distress and Denying Plaintiff's Motion to Amend the Complaint
  • Lynch v. W. Johnson 1985 April 15; Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion (1985 June 14); Order; Opinion (1985 November 26); Order
  • Malone v. Ford Motor Co. 1985 January 21; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Master Diamond Wholesalers Corp. v. Santana 1985 January 16; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • McBride v. Sperber 1985 November 19; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1985 November 29; Opinion of the 3rd Cir. on appeal; Judgment
  • Monroe v. Beyers 1985 June 20; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1985 March 21; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Napier v. Philips 1985 September 11; Opinion; Opinion (1985 September 17); Order
  • Nataraj v. United States 1985 November 15; Opinion; Exhibits I, II; Order
  • Olitsky v. Rafferty 1985 August 22; Opinion; Order
  • Paranee v. Twel 1985 March 06; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Pasqua v. Essex County 1985 June 14; Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Rockwell Int'l v. Midland Transp. Co. 1985 September 24; Letter-Opinion; Letter to Robert G. Mazeau; Exhibit G; Order; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Nat'l Eng'g Co. 1985 September 16; Opinion; Order
  • Roehsler v. Karcher 1985 January 23; Opinion; Order
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1985 March 12; Opinion; Order; Order; Order; Letter-Opinion (1985 May 13); Order
  • Say v. Smith 1985 December 20; Opinion
  • Shakoor v. Fauver 1985 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Shane v. Tard 1985 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Simmons v. Tard 1985 November 27; Opinion; Order
  • Stover v. Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. 1985 March 01; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order
  • Swangler v. Tard 1985 August 22; Opinion; Order; Letter from Charles E. Swangler; Letter to Charles E. Swangler
  • United States v. Caballero 1985 September 24; Opinion; Order Denying Relief Pursuant to Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
  • United States v. DeLuca 1985 March 18; Opinion
  • United States v. Ewing 1985 May 28; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Lindsley 1985 July 05; Opinion; Exhibits A, B, C
  • United States v. Sardina 1985 October 17; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Serpone 1985 June 17; Letter-Opinion; Order Denying Motion for Reconsideration

Box 6:

  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1985 November 19; Opinion; Order
  • Wells v. Consol. Rail Corp. 1985 January 21; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • White v. Van Lieu 1985 February 05; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Whitted v. Zelinski 1985 March 12; Opinion; Order; Notice of Allocation and Assignment; Order of Dismissal
  • Wyckoff v. Wyckoff 1985 December 04; Opinion; Order

Series 4: Papers, 1986
Boxes 6-9:
All papers dated 1986. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 6:

  • Alston v. Fauver 1986 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Anastasio v. Schering Corp. 1986 September 25; Opinion; Judgment
  • Asken v. Quinn 1986 November 10; Opinion; Order
  • Bellino v. Kinney 1986 September 15; Opinion; Order
  • Billups v. Wesley-Jessen, Inc. 1986 September 22; Opinion; Order
  • Blackston v. United States 1986 February 18; Letter-Opinion; Order | Opinion on Application by Plaintiff-Appellant for Transcripts without Charge; Order (1985 December 12) | Opinion; Order (1985 October 24)
  • Bd. of Ed. of the E. Windsor Reg'l Sch. Dist. v. Diamond 1986 October 17; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Bonney v. Hertz Sys. 1986 January 31; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Bowes v. Dep't of the Navy 1986 January 24; Opinion; Order
  • Brevel Motors v. Vendo Co. 1986 November 03; Opinion; Order; Published as: Brevel Motors v. Vendo Co., No. 84-3423, 1986 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18277 (D. N.J. Oct. 31, 1986).
  • Brown v. Dietz 1986 July 29; Opinion; Order
  • Cardozo v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1986 September 29; Opinion; Order
  • Coleman v. Becton Dickinson & Co. 1986 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • Condone v. Sec'y of the Army 1986 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1986 March 03; Order; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order (1986 May 08) | Opinion; Order (1986 November 12)
  • In re Corvelli 1986 December 03; Opinion; Order
  • Cox v. Hilton 1986 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Cummis v. RRI XX Mgmt. Corp. 1986 July 24; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Curry v. Tard 1986 July 08; Opinion; Order; Memo from Michael Jankoski (1986 September 04); Letter from Lyle P. Hough (1986 August 28); Letter to Lyle P. Hough (1986 August 18); Letter to Rudolph J. Curry (1986 February 19); Letter from Rudolph J. Curry (1986 July 20); Letter to Rudolph J. Curry (1986 November 18); Letter to Philip J. Moran (nd)
  • Drayton v. Fauver 1986 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Dressler v. Plantier 1986 March 17; Opinion; Stipulation of Dismissal; Order; Order
  • East Wind Indus. v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury 1986 June 18; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Robert E. Cowen)
  • Ekins v. Kenworth Truck Co. 1986 October 16; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Falter v. Veterans Admin. 1986 January 31; Opinion (x2); Order (x2); Letter to William F. Culleton and Anne C. Singer (1986 April 16) (x2); Errata Order (1986 April 17); Letter from Anne C. Singer (1986 February 13); Letter from Anne C. Singer (1986 March 26); Letter to Thomas P. Adler (1986 May 19); Letter from Thomas P. Adler (1986 May 13)
  • Farese v. Hicks 1986 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Federal Inv. Corp. v. Reid 1986 September 22; Opinion; Order Dismissing Appeal
  • Freund v. Heckler 1986 September 29; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Garolis v. Tr. of the Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund 1986 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Gendzwill v. Ziff-Davis Publ'g Co. 1986 February 28; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • Gen. Accident Ins. Co. v. Torres 1986 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Gilmore v. State 1986 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Gonzalez v. Two or More Named Unknown U.S. Customs Serv. Employees 1986 March 24; Opinion; Order

Box 7:

  • Grant v. Ewing 1986 February 10; Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Grant v. Vitanzo 1986 February 10; Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Gruen Indus. v. Gruen Elec. 1986 October 16; Opinion; Order; Report and Recommendation of U.S.M. Serena Perretti (1985 September 30)
  • Haag v. Fauver 1986 June 18; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. Eisenberg, Honig & Fogler 1986 November 05; Opinion; Order
  • Helbig v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1986 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Wolf Creek Vill., Inc. 1986 November 19; Opinion
  • Improta v. Weehawken Bd. of Ed. 1986 April 22; Opinion
  • Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Local 220 v. Solomon 1986 July 31; Letter-Opinion
  • J. I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1986 October 07; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order Quashing Subpoenas (1986 December 15)
  • Johnson v. Gregorio 1986 July 22; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Johnson v. Monmouth County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 1986 April 30; Opinion; Order; Letter from Richard A. Amadur (1986 May 01); Letter from Michael Johnson (1986 May 07); Letter from Michael Johnson (1986 May 13); Letter to Michael Johnson (1986 May 20)
  • Jolley v. Tard 1986 April 04; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. 1986 January 15; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Smith 1986 May 06; Opinion; Order
  • Kicklighter v. United States 1986 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank 1986 October 31; Opinion | Letter to Bruce E. Clark and James C. McConnon; Order (1986 December 30)
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Business Sys., Inc. 1986 September 24; Opinion; Order; Letter from Louis J. Virelli (1986 October 14) | Opinion; Judgment (1986 June 27); Brief in Support of Motion to Correct Judgment under Rule 60(a) (1986 July 14); Order Correcting Judgment under Rule 60(a) (1986 August 06); Order Amending Opinion (1986 August 07)
  • Kurash v. Mountain Leisure Assoc. 1986 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • La Marca v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1986 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • Laifer v. Twin County Grocers 1986 June 26; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Lake v. United States 1986 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Lord v. Tard 1986 June 19; Order
  • Martino v. Metro. Transit Auth. 1986 June 20; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • McGill v. Schiedemantel 1986 March 07; Opinion; Order; Order of Dismissal
  • McGilloway v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co. 1986 June 13; Transcript of Proceedings
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1986 June 12; Letter-Opinion; Order for De Bene Esse Depositions in Japan | Opinion; Order (1986 July 10)
  • McNamara v. Brown 1986 April 18; Opinion; Order
  • In re Menon 1986 February 19; Opinion; Order
  • Mentzel v. Fountain Motel 1986 February 06; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Mentzel v. Hollmann 1986 March 11; Transcript of Proceedings | Transcript of Proceedings (1986 June 11)
  • Miller v. Honda Motor Co. 1986 December 10; Opinion (incomplete); Order
  • Mirault v. Neubert 1986 June 30; Opinion; Order of Dismissals; Order
  • Mokone v. Maaga 1986 May 01; Opinion; Order
  • Molas v. Marine Eng'r Beneficial Ass'n Pension Trust 1986 October 23; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Molese v. Bergen County Prosecutor's Office 1986 July 31; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Murphy v. Gen. Elec. Credit Corp. 1986 August 01; Opinion; Order

Box 8:

  • Narvaez v. Rodriguez 1986 November 05; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Nasmith v. City of Newark 1986 November 03; Opinion; Order
  • Nat'l Amateur Roller Skating Ass'n v. U.S. Amateur Confederation of Roller Skating 1986 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • National Indus. Group Pension Plan v. Gluntz Brass & Aluminum Foundry Co. 1986 September 24; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Newspaper Guild of N.Y. v. Middlesex County Publ'g Co. 1986 March 03; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Nina Ricci v. FAP Imports, Inc. 1986 November 07; Motion for Preliminary Injunction - Argument (Draft from "MQ")
  • Nyberg v. Wood Indus. 1986 October 15; Letter-Opinion; Report and Recommendation of U.S.M. G. Donald Haneke; Order of Dismissal
  • Oliver v. Prisciotta 1986 July 24; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Oppenheim v. Hartford Ins. Group 1986 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Panzitta v. United States 1986 August 14; Order | Opinion; Order (1985 December 04)
  • Penna v. Rafferty 1986 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Progressive Inv. Corp. v. Midland Ins. Co. 1986 May 28; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1986 July 01)
  • Quantum Prod. Serv. v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co. 1986 July 01; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1986 October 16) | Opinion (1986 December 03)
  • Ramco Am. Int'l v. Air Operations Int'l 1986 April 11; Opinion; Order Dismissing Complaint
  • Robinson v. Edwards 1986 July 09; Opinion; Order of Dismissal; Order
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1986 June 03; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Schlobohm v. Wagner 1986 June 03; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Schwec v. United States 1986 April 29; Opinion; Order
  • Shible v. United States 1986 February 13; Opinion; Order | Letter from West Publishing Co. (with reply message from J. Bissell); Two pages from Vol. 57, American Federal Tax Reports, 2nd Series; Letter from Frederick T. Day | Letter-Opinion; Order (1986 April 15) | Order (1986 August 13)
  • Shihadeh v. Tard 1986 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Sigler v. D'Amico 1986 June 24; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. Rafferty 1986 March 05; Opinion; Order; Order
  • State v. Thomas 1986 December 16; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Supka v. Worldwide Yacht Charters 1986 February 18; Letter-Opinion; Judgment Order
  • Taylor v. Wyeth Lab. 1986 April 09; Opinion; Order; Errata Order
  • Terrell v. Tard 1986 May 16; Opinion; Order
  • Tiger Inn v. Edwards 1986 June 09; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Robert E. Cowen)
  • Tilley v. Schering Corp. 1986 December 03; Opinion; Order
  • Twp. of Clinton v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1986 June 18; Opinion (opinion of Chief Judge Fisher)
  • Twp. of Ocean v. Int'l Surplus Lines Ins. Co. 1986 June 09; Opinion; Order
  • Trombetta v. Peil 1986 July 22; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Escarda 1986 December 29; Letter-Opinion; Exhibits A, B; Order
  • United States v. Febre 1986 June 18; Opinion Denying Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255; Order Denying Relief Pursuant to Motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255
  • United States v. Gallagher 1986 June 12; Letter-Opinion; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order (1986 October 07) | Letter-Opinion; Order (1986 December 16)
  • United States v. Gambino 1986 November 12; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Liberto 1986 December 31; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Lindsley 1986 June 23; Letter-Opinion; Exhibits A, B, C; Order
  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1986 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Thomas 1986 April 29; Letter-Opinion; Order; Letter from Eric Thomas

Box 9:

  • Varca v. Fauver 1986 June 03; Opinion; Order; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Vornado v. Tr. of the Retail Store Employees' Union, Local 1262 1986 December 03; Opinion; Order
  • Washington v. Hilton 1986 March 17; Opinion; Report and Recommendation of U.S.M. John W. Devine; Order for Judgment
  • Weiss v. United States 1986 November 12; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • White v. Van Lieu 1986 April 18; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Collier 1986 March 10; Opinion; Order
  • Young Life v. Young Life of Africa 1986 March 21; Opinion; Order for Partial Summary Judgment Granting Permanent Injunction
  • Zamboni v. Stamler 1986 May 09; Opinion; Order

Series 5: Papers, 1987
Boxes 9-13:
All papers dated 1987. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 9:

  • Abate v. Monroe Sys. for Bus. 1987 June 30; Opinion
  • Admin. Office of the U.S. Courts 1987 December 18; Memorandum: "H.R. 3483 - The Criminal Fines Improvement Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-185); S 1822 - The Sentencing Act of 1987 (P.L. 100-182)"
  • Am. Centennial Ins. v. Underwriters, Inc. 1987 September 23; Opinion; Order
  • Anastasio v. Schering Corp. 1987 February 18; Letter-Opinion; Order Denying Defendant's Motion for a New Trial and Awarding Plaintiff Supplemental Attorneys Fees and Costs
  • Anthony Petroleum v. Baii Banking Corp. 1987 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Artway v. Scheidemantel 1987 October 28; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Robert E. Cowen); Order
  • Asken v. Thomas 1987 February 09; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Axelrod v. U.S. Judiciary 1987 May 26; Opinion; Dismissal Order
  • Baldwin v. Bonazzi 1987 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Barbosa v. Harris 1987 February 13; Opinion; Order; Order for Judgment (1987 May 12)
  • Barry v. Brower 1987 August 14; Opinion
  • Battle v. County of Union 1987 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Bench Comment (Publication of the Federal Judicial Center) 1987 December 01; Newsletter 1987 No. 5: "Post-indictment restraining orders under the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act"
  • Blanks v. Heckler 1987 July 10; Opinion; Order
  • In re Bob's E. Contracting 1987 January 15; Opinion; Exhibits A, B; Order
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1987 September 30; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1987 September 30)
  • Cardoso v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1987 May 18; Letter-Opinion; Errata Order; Order
  • Chambers v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co. 1987 July 08; Opinion; Order
  • Ciaravino v. Dir. 1987 October 01; Opinion
  • Cole v. Pathmark of Fairlawn 1987 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • Computran Sys. Corp. v. Inductotherm Indus. 1987 October 08; Opinion
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1987 October 09; Opinion; Order
  • Cooper v. Tard 1987 October 09; Opinion; Order
  • Cox v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 1987 June 24; Opinion
  • Davis v. Sec'y of Health and Human Serv. 1987 November 09; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Rafferty 1987 September 16; Opinion; Order
  • Deeks v. Lake 1987 September 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: Deeks v. Lake, No. 85-2947, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14873 (D. N.J. Apr. 30, 1987); No. 85-2947, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14875 (D. N.J. Sept. 21, 1987).

Box 10:

  • Dunn v. New Jersey Transit Corp. 1987 November 13; Opinion; Order; Corrected pages marked "Corrections sent to West" (Published at 681 F.Supp. 246 (D.N.J.,1987))
  • Durrof v. Pike County Dev. Ctr. 1987 February 17; Opinion; Order
  • Dutka v. Bello 1987 May 29; Letter-Opinion; Order Granting Judgment | Letter-Opinion; Order (1986 June 22) | Letter-Opinion; Order for Dismissal (1986 April 17)
  • Euro Imp. v. Roth 1987 December 14; Opinion; Order
  • Falter v. Veterans Admin. 1987 March 11; Letter from A.U.S.A. Anne C. Singer; Letter from William F. Culleton, Jr.
  • Farlow v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation 1987 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Federowitz v. Goldman 1987 March 10; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Fidelity Union Bank v. United States 1987 January 05; Opinion; Order | Transcript of Proceedings (1987 October 02)
  • Figueroa v. Rafferty 1987 June 17; Opinion; Order
  • Football Generals, Inc. v. J. W. Duncan, Inc. 1987 November 18; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • Frankel v. Shearson Lehman Bros. 1987 October 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Frankel v. Shearson Lehman Bros., No. 86-2520, 1987 U.S. Dist.
  • LEXIS 16099 (D. N.J. Oct. 30, 1987).
  • Freund v. Bowen 1987 May 01; Opinion; Order
  • Garolis v. Tr. of the Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund 1987 June 30; Opinion
  • General Electric Co. v. Heis 1987 December 07; Opinion; Order for Preliminary Injunction
  • Gleis v. Norman 1987 September 10; Letter-Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1987 September 21)
  • Grace v. City of Newark 1987 May 13; Opinion; Order
  • Granados v. U.S. Immigration 1987 December 28; Opinion
  • Gross v. Xerox Corp. 1987 March 06; Opinion
  • Gruhin v. Insall 1987 June 25; Letter-Opinion
  • Haight v. Grund 1987 November 24; Opinion; Order
  • Hardy v. Maucelli & Parkwood Gardens Assoc. 1987 October 26; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Helbig v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1987 January 29; Opinion; Exhibits A, B; Order
  • Henry v. Beyer 1987 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Wolf Creek Vill., Inc. 1987 May 05; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Huiswoud v. Cuozzo 1987 June 24; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Paint Co. v. Myers Eng'g, Inc. 1987 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. United States 1987 July 27; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 11:

  • Jodeco v. Hann 1987 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. City of Paterson 1987 December 14; Opinion; Order
  • Karlen v. Tribune Cable Commc'n 1987 May 26; Opinion; Order
  • Karolis v. Beyers 1987 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Kievit v. Rokeach 1987 October 29; Opinion; Order; Order; Order; Published as: Kievit v. Rokeach, No. 91-2907, 1987 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16131 (D. N.J. Oct. 29, 1987).
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank 1987 March 10; Letter-Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1987 November 16)
  • La Pollo v. Gen. Elec. Co. 1987 July 15; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.C. Senior Judge Mitchell H. Cohen); Order
  • Lair v. Fauver 1987 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Lantz v. Loral Packaging 1987 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • Lynch v. Gore 1987 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • MacKenzie v. City of Newark 1987 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Mallon v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. 1987 May 26; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • McCarty v. Am. Cyanamid Co. 1987 December 23; Opinion; Order
  • McCutchen v. G.H. Realty Co. 1987 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1987 March 13; Opinion; Judgment and Order
  • McMahan v. Bowen 1987 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • McManus v. Hous. Auth. of Englewood 1987 April 10; Opinion; Order
  • Meadows v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1987 June 24; Memorandum Opinion and Order
  • Mele v. Bowen 1987 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Metall-Chemie Handelgesell-Schaft m.b.H. & Co. v. Seacor 1987 March 17; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Miller v. Anscher 1987 June 25; Opinion
  • Miller v. U.S. Capital Corp. 1987 December 01; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Miraglia v. D'Ilio 1987 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Misiewicz v. Bowen 1987 November 06; Opinion; Order
  • Monon Corp. v. Centre Serv. 1987 December 23; Opinion; Order
  • Mt. Everest Ski Shops v. Ski Barn, Inc. 1987 April 03; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Najafi v. Rosen 1987 April 27; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Napier v. Philips, Appel & Walden 1987 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Dep't of Envtl. Prot. v. Gloucester Envtl. Serv. 1987 August 20; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Stanley S. Brotman); Order
  • Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. Newspaper & Mail Deliverers Union 1987 February 13; Opinion; Order
  • Olitsky v. Rafferty 1987 April 30; Opinion; Order

Box 12:

  • Organon v. Int'l Union of Elec. Workers 1987 September 28; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Orr v. Sterling Limousine Corp. 1987 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Patnode v. Horowitz 1987 September 21; Opinion; Order
  • Pecone v. United States 1987 February 18; Opinion; Order
  • In re Period Design Homes 1987 April 30; Opinion; Order
  • Perkins v. Fauver 1987 January 27; Opinion; Order
  • Perretti v. Serraino 1987 June 10; Opinion; Order
  • Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n of N.J. v. Twp. of Washington 1987 October 08; Opinion with Judgment and Order (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Joseph H. Rodriguez)
  • Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. U.S. Gypsum, Inc. 1987 March 28; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Harold A. Ackerman)
  • Quantum Prod. Serv. v. Pub. Serv. Gas & Electric Co. 1987 May 28; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Rabil-Alamin v. Passaic County Tech. & Vocational High Sch. 1987 September 29; Opinion
  • Ragland v. Tard 198706110; Opinion; Order
  • Randolph v. Brown 1987 March 03; Opinion; Order
  • Redding v. Dietz 1987 June 10; Opinion; Order
  • Schaefer v. Bateman Eichler Hill Richards, Inc. 1987 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • Sebastian Int'l v. Consumer Contacts 1987 June 30; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Maryanne Trump Barry); Order
  • Sellers v. Johnson 1987 October 14; Opinion; Order
  • Shields v. Murphy 1987 August 04; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Stanley S. Brotman); Order
  • Smith v. Englehardt 1987 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. U.S. Sav. & Loan Ass'n 1987 October 16; Opinion; Order
  • State v. Thomas 1987 October 13; Opinion; Order
  • Taylor v. State 1987 April 16; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1987 August 17)
  • Teltser v. Czin 1987 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Temco Home Health Care Prod. v. Everest & Jennings 1987 November 12; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Thomas v. Meese 1987 May 27; Opinion; Order; Dismissal Order
  • Thomas v. State 1987 February 26; Opinion; Order of Dismissal
  • Thornbury v. Am. Vermiculite Corp. 1987 March 10; Transcript of Proceedings
  • United States v. Cannon 1987 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Farber 1987 October 02; Transcript of Proceedings
  • United States v. Horace Mann Ins. Co. 1987 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Nelson No Date; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Maryanne Trump Barry)
  • United States v. Perticone 1987 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Prieto 1987 September 29; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Russo 1987 May 26; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 13:

  • United States v. Salconi 1987 February 11; Letter-Opinion
  • United States v. Stine 1987 February 03; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Surretsky 1987 August 05; Opinion; Order
  • Walker v. Goodyear Serv. Store 1987 March 26; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Washington v. Conrail 1987 March 20; Opinion; Order
  • Weatherspoon v. Curtiss-Wright Flight Sys. 1987 July 21; Opinion
  • Zamboni v. Stamler 1987 June 10; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1987 November 30)

Series 6: Papers, 1988
Boxes 13-17:
All papers dated 1988. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 13:

  • Abd-Allah v. Neubert 1988 November 29; Opinion; Order
  • Aetna Cas. & Surety Co. v. Moran 1988 March 03; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Agosto v. Hous. Auth. of Hoboken 1988 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Ali v. City of Linden 1988 October 24; Opinion; Order
  • Anastasio v. Schering Corp. 1988 June 06; Opinion; Exhibit A
  • Anthony Petroleum, Inc. v. Baii Banking Corp. 1988 June 21; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 October 27)
  • Aquatherm Prod. Corp. v. James Wholesale Drug Co. 1988 January 15; Opinion; Order
  • Banfield v. Middlesex County Adult Corr. Ctr. 1988 September 13; Opinion; Order
  • Berkner v. Epstein 1988 January 22; Letter-Opinion; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order (1988 January 29) | Letter-Opinion; Order (1988 March 24)
  • Berson v. Alexander & Alexander, Inc. 1988 May 09; Opinion; Order
  • Blum v. Wico Chem. Corp. 1988 December 27; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. H. Lee Sarokin)
  • Brito v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Broski v. Pennsylvania 1988 January 15; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1988 January 06; Letter-Opinion; Order; Order
  • Brown v. Neubert 1988 August 29; Opinion; Order
  • Bryant v. Bowen 1988 March 03; Opinion; Order; Published as: Bryant v. Bowen, 683 F. Supp. 95 (D. N.J. 1988).
  • Chemisphere Tech. Corp. v. Metalx 1988 July 28; Opinion; Order
  • China Ocean Shipping Co. v. Maher Terminals 1988 January 20; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • Christopher v. Gabriel 1988 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Clayton v. Beyer 1988 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Clemons v. Fauver 1988 May 18; Opinion; Order
  • Crest Audio v. Dunlop Mfg. 1988 July 20; Opinion
  • Crowell v. Menchin 1988 July 27; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1988 July 21; Opinion; Order
  • Deeks v. Lake 1988 August 01; Opinion; Order; Published as: Deeks v. Lake, No. 85-2947, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16686 (D. N.J. May 25, 1988).
  • Delgado v. Twp. of West New York 1988 June 15; Opinion; Order

Box 14:

  • Demby v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 1988 June 20; Opinion; Order
  • Des Moines '81 Assoc. v. F.W. Woolworth & Co. 1988 July 21; Opinion; Order
  • Duffy v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Dynatron/Bondo Corp. v. Clausen Co. 1988 September 22; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 November 30)
  • In re Elsinore Shore Assoc. 1988 February 03; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Stanley S. Brotman); Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1988 February 12; Opinion; Order; Exhibits A, B | Opinion; Order (1988 November 04) | Opinion; Order (1988 November 16)
  • Essex Chem. Corp. v. Gruit-Heberlein AG 1988 June 24; Opinion; Published as: Essex Chem. Corp. v. Gruit-Heberlein AG, No. 88-2478, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19515 (D. N.J. June 24, 1988).; No. 88-2478, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16708 (D. N.J. June 24, 1988).
  • Federowicz v. Goldman 1988 October 11; Opinion; Order
  • Filter Equip. Co. v. Membrana Corp. 1988 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Food Fresh, Inc. v. Stay Fresh, Ltd. 1988 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Football Generals, Inc. v. J.W. Duncan, Inc. 1988 October 14; Opinion; Order
  • Franchise Stores Realty Corp. v. Ross 1988 January 28; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • Frankel v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc. 1988 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • Gadson v. Baer 1988 August 09; Opinion and Order
  • Geeter v. Marsh 1988 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Gen. Biscuit Brands v. R.K.D. Oil Co. 1988 May 23; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Gen. Elec. Co. v. Heis 1988 September 14; Opinion; Final Judgment
  • Gomez v. Iberia Airlines of Spain 1988 March 17; Opinion; Order
  • Granados v. U.S. Immigration 1988 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Green v. Bowen 1988 April 11; Opinion; Order
  • Groel v. L.F. Rothschild & Co. 1988 June 28; Transcript of Proceedings
  • Gulf & W. Mfg. Co. v. United Steelworkers of Am. 1988 February 09; Transcript of Proceedings; Order; Published as: Gulf & W. Mfg. Co. v. United Steelworkers of Am., 694 F. Supp. 38 (D. N.J. 1988).
  • Gussin Gen. P'ship v. Sabarese 1988 December 08; Opinion; Affidavit of Alfred C. Constants III; Order
  • Guzman v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Harden v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Hardy v. Maucelli 1988 September 13; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. Commc'n Techniques, Inc. 1988 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Heaton v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Hellring Lindeman Goldstein Siegal Stern & Greenberg v. Skulsky 1988 February 29; Opinion; Order
  • Holloway v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1988 January 20; Letter-Opinion; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order (1988 March 02)
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Ingersoll & Bloch Chartered 1988 September 22; Opinion; Order

Box 15:

  • Hudak v. Unisonic Prod. Corp. 1988 April 07; Transcript of Proceedings; Judgment
  • Improta v. Weehawken Bd. of Ed. 1988 October 18; Opinion
  • Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Hop-On Int'l Corp. 1988 September 30; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers Union, Local 220 v. Solomon 1988 September 23; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Union v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1988 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • J. Gerber & Co. v. First Fidelity Bank 1988 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • J.I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1988 May 25; Opinion; Judgment
  • Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Int'l Union of Operating Eng'r 1988 July 29; Opinion; Exhibit A; Order
  • Kaufman v. Hoffman La-Roche, Inc. 1988 September 13; Opinion; Order
  • Key v. Tisch 1988 May 11; Opinion; Order
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Business Sys., Inc. 1988 February 10; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 May 31) | Opinion; Order (1988 June 01)
  • Kirker Chem. Co. v. Sanfilippo 1988 July 27; Opinion; Order
  • Koproski v. Cottle 1988 December 20; Opinion; Order
  • Lacewell v. U.S. Dep't of Hous. & Urban Dev. 1988 October 19; Opinion; Order
  • Lee v. Carey Canada, Inc. 1988 May 25; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 December 01)
  • Leige v. Am. Hoist & Derrick Co. 1988 November 29; Opinion; Order
  • Lynch v. Consolidated R.R. Corp. 1988 September 22; Opinion; Order Granting Summary Judgment in Favor of Defendant
  • Lyons Capital Res. v. Rome Diagnostic Assoc. 1988 September 14; Letter-Opinion; Order | Transcript of Proceedings (1988 March 09); Order
  • Maher v. Siemens Medical Sys. 1988 February 08; Transcript of Proceedings; Order
  • Mallon v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. 1988 May 10; Opinion; Order; Published as: Mallon v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 688 F. Supp. 997 (D. N.J. 1988).
  • Manfra v. Hertz Corp. 1988 March 03; Opinion; Order
  • Marotta Scientific Controls v. RLI Ins. Co. 1988 February 25; Opinion; Order for Dismissal | Letter-Opinion; Order (1988 March 16)
  • Martinez v. United States 1988 September 07; Opinion and Order
  • McKenna v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • McMillan v. Lincoln Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n 1988 February 09; Opinion; Order; Published as: McMillan v. Lincoln Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 678 F. Supp. 89 (D. N.J. 1988).
  • McSwain v. Beyer 1988 March 11; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Meyer v. Int'l Playtex 1988 December 01; Opinion; Order; Published as: Meyer v. Int'l Playtex, 724 F. Supp. 288 (D. N.J. 1988)
  • Monon Corp. v. Ctr. Serv. 1988 January 11; Transcript of Proceedings | Opinion; Order (1988 September 14)
  • Narvaez v. Rodriguez 1988 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • Nebus v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Netelkos v. Star Ledger 1988 May 20; Opinion; Order

Box 16:

  • Netelkos v. Weinberg 1988 May 20; Opinion; Order
  • O'Brien v. Borough of Woodbury Heights 1988 February 11; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Stanley S. Brotman); Order
  • Peaceman v. S.B. Thomas, Inc. 1988 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Poole v. Stephens 1988 May 16; Opinion; Exhibits A, B; Order; Published as: Poole v. Stephens, 688 F. Supp. 149 (D. N.J. 1988).
  • Porter v. ITT Corp. 1988 April 04; Opinion; Order | Opinion (undated) │ Opinion; Order
  • Provident Sav. Bank v. Aspen Impressions, Inc. 1988 September 28; Opinion; Order for Summary Judgment
  • Reliance Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. CNA 1988 May 23; Transcript of Proceedings | Opinion; Order (1988 July 28)
  • RFAC Int'l v. IBM 1988 July 01; Amended Opinion
  • Rosen v. Union of Am. Hebrew Congregation 1988 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Roxas v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • RPM Dev. Corp. v. City of Orange Twp. 1988 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • Seamon v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Sec. Investor Protection Corp. v. Christian-Paine & Co. 1988 September 23; Opinion; Order
  • Sellers v. Marcik 1988 March 29; Opinion; Order
  • Skandia Ins. Co. v. McDonnell Douglas Helicopters 1988 December 21; Opinion; Order Dismissing Complaint against Defendant
  • Spiegel v. State 1988 September 14; Opinion; Order
  • Stigliano v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Stocker v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order
  • Student Pub. Interest Research Group of N.J. v. Am. Cyanamid Co. 1988 July 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: Student Pub. Interest Research Group of N.J. v. Am. Cyanamid Co., No. 83-2068, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17241 (D. N.J. July 21, 1988).
  • Sussex Drug Prod. Co. v. Kanasco 1988 March 16; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 June 15)
  • Tillman v. State 1988 March 03; Opinion and Order
  • U.S. Golf Ass'n v. U.S. Amateur Golf Ass'n 1988 August 05; Opinion and Order (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Nicholas H. Politan)
  • United States v. Algon Chem., Inc. 1988 April 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1988 January 27; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Anthony Dell'Aquila Enter. 1988 August 11; Transcript of Proceedings; Published as: United States v. Anthony Dell'Aquila Enter., No. 88-3232, 1988 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17097 (D. N.J. Aug. 5, 1988).
  • United States v. Basulto 1988 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Freeman 1988 June 06; Opinion; Order Granting Partial Summary Judgment and Final Judgment | Opinion; Order; Order (1988 December 02)
  • United States v. Gambino 1988 March 10; Opinion; Exhibits A, B; Order
  • United States v. Kraselnick 1988 December 22; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Stanley S. Brotman); Order
  • United States v. Vargas 1988 November 01; Opinion
  • United States v. Villard 1988 February 11; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Joseph H. Rodriguez)
  • United States v. Wilson 1988 February 18; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Zapata 1988 March 02; Letter-Opinion; Order

Box 17:

  • Vetere v. United States 1988 October 24; Opinion; Order
  • Viggiani v. U.S. Postal Office 1988 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • Waigand v. Equal Employment Opportunity Program 1988 September 14; Opinion; Order
  • Walizer v. Bowen 1988 February 19; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Washington v. Tisch 1988 April 05; Opinion; Order
  • Welsh v. Truck Drivers & Chauffeurs Union, Local 478 1988 July 21; Opinion; Order
  • West v. Conrail 1988 March 29; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1988 November 30)
  • Williamson v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06; Opinion and Order

Series 7: Papers, 1989
Boxes 17-21:
All papers dated 1989. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 17:

  • A M Int'l v. Hartz Mountain Indus. 1989 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Abate v. Monroe Sys. for Bus. 1989 May 08; Opinion; Order; Amended Order
  • Allen v. City of Jersey City 1989 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Am. Body & Equip. v. Meyer Prod. 1989 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Am. Cyanamid Co. v. S.C. Johnson & Sons 1989 August 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Am. Cyanamid Co. v. S.C. Johnson & Sons, 729 F. Supp. 1018 (D. N.J. 1989).
  • Anello v. Merck & Co. 1989 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Aviles v. Am. Newark Assoc. 1989 April 20; Opinion; Order
  • Bello v. Middlesex County Adult Corr. Ctr. 1989 April 04; Opinion; Order and Order to Show Cause | Opinion; Order (1989 June 01)
  • Bellotti v. United States 1989 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Berkner v. Epstein 1989 February 02; Opinion
  • Book v. Postmaster 1989 October 02; Opinion; Order
  • In re Brinke Transp. Corp. 1989 July 18; Opinion; Order; Published as: In re Brinke Transp. Corp., No. 89-1778, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17577 (D. N.J. July 18, 1989).
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1989 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Bryant v. Motivated Guard Serv. 1989 January 25; Opinion; Order
  • Chan v. Philippine Airlines 1989 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • Ciano v. American-Darling Valve 1989 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Conoco v. Tank Barge Interstate 36 1989 February 02; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1989 May 12)

Box 18:

  • Consol. Rail Corp. v. City of Bayonne 1989 October 12; Opinion; Order | Opinion (19891109; Published as: Consol. Rail Corp. v. City of Bayonne, 724 F. Supp. 320 (D. N.J. 1989).
  • Control Air v. Am. Trans-Freight 1989 December 01; Opinion; Order; Order Setting Aside Default
  • CPC Int'l v. Int'l Ins. Co. 1989 March 27; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Milford Jai Alai 1989 October 10; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Davis v. Waterfront & Airport Comm'n 1989 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Del. Valley Transplant Program v. Coye 1989 October 16; Opinion; Order (Opinion and Order of U.S.D.J Stanley S. Brotman)
  • Dole v. Int'l Union of Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers Local 427 1989 April 11; Opinion; Order
  • Dynatron/Bondo Corp. v. Clausen Co. 1989 January 25; Opinion; Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda v. C. Itoh & Co. 1989 February 21; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order
  • Entran Devices v. Interocean Sys. 1989 June 16; Opinion; Exhibits 21, 22; Judgment
  • F. von Langsdorf Licensing v. Grinnell Concrete Paving-Stones, Inc. 1989 June 19; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1989 September 01)
  • Farash v. Robert Tabakow Co. 1989 January 26; Opinion
  • Fed. Nat'l Mortgage Ass'n v. Casey 1989 August 24; Opinion; Order (Order 19890825)
  • Florabelle Flowers v. Bos 1989 July 05; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1989 November 13)
  • Football Generals v. Duncan 1989 May 09; Opinion; Order
  • Forest Park Apartments v. Sylvan Coin Laundry 1989 November 20; Opinion; Order
  • Figatner v. Merrill Lynch, Pierce, Fenner, & Smith 1989 August 16; Opinion; Order Granting Summary Judgment
  • Firetek Corp. v. Nat'l Guardian Sec. Serv. Corp. 1989 June 01; Opinion | Opinion (1989 September 18)
  • First Fidelity Bank v. Parness 1989 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Frank Music Corp. v. Thirty Harding Ave. 1989 May 24; Opinion; Default Judgment
  • Golden City Bank v. Rutherford Commercial Corp. 1989 October 06; Opinion
  • Gov't of the Virgin Islands v. Commission 1989 February 16; Opinion; Order (Opinion and Order of U.S.D.J Stanley S. Brotman)
  • Gumbs v. Cielo 1989 September 01; Opinion | Affidavit (1989 August 03) | Certification Supporting Application for Entry of Default Judgment by Clerk (1989 April 17) | Request to Enter Default (1989 March 03) | Summons & Complaint (copy) (1987 October 16) | Exhibits B, C

Box 19:

  • Hardwick v. Cuomo 1989 April 12; Opinion; Order
  • Hargreaves v. Passaic Metal Prod. 1989 February 03; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. Eisenberg, Honig & Fogler 1989 July 13; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1989 November 13)
  • Harris v. Schiedemantel 1989 May 02; Opinion; Order
  • Heller v. Carter 1989 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Howard Johnson Franchise Sys. v. Musikantow 1989 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Union v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1989 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. Mahler 1989 November 21; Opinion; Order
  • Jayme v. Bd. of Veterans Appeals 1989 June 07; Opinion; Order
  • Jollister Shipping Corp. v. 3,000 Metric Tons of Granite Blocks 1989 October 03; Opinion; Order
  • Kehoe v. Keister 1989 December 22; Opinion; Exhibits (2); Judgment; Published as: Kehoe v. Keister, 727 F. Supp. 896 (D. N.J. 1989).
  • Kerollis v. U.S. Air, Inc. 1989 February 07; Opinion; Order │ Opinion (1989 June 12), Order
  • Kimberlin v. Craftmatic Comfort Mfg. Corp. 1989 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Lee v. Carey Canada, Inc. 1989 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Levitin v. Herman 1989 November 27; Opinion; Order
  • Levinson v. Budd Foods 1989 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Lucy v. Am. Paper Sales 1989 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Lyons Capital Res. v. Rome Diagnostic Assoc. 1989 July 14; Opinion; Order
  • Mack Boring Parts Co. v. Moffitt 1989 April 21; Opinion; Order
  • Manfra v. Hertz Corp. 1989 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • McQuestion v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1989 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • Meneses v. Stephens 1989 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Mega Computer Sys. v. Remance 1989 June 14; Opinion; Order
  • Midlantic Nat'l Bank v. Fed. Plaza Medical Assoc. 1989 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Metro. Steel Indus. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. 1989 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Millipore Corp. v. New Brunswick Scientific Co. 1989 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Mollett v. Frank 1989 January 25; Opinion; Order
  • Monon Corp. v. Ctr. Serv. 1989 June 06; Opinion; Order
  • Monarch Entertainment Bureau v. Newton 1989 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • N. Feather Int'l v. Those Certain London Underwriters 1989 February 22; Opinion; Order; Published as: N. Feather Int'l v. Those Certain London Underwriters, 714 F. Supp. 1352 (D. N.J. 1989).

Box 20:

  • Oral Research Lab. v. L. Perrigo Co. 1989 June 23; Opinion; Order
  • O'Reilly v. Specification Built Corp. 1989 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Panek v. Bagucz 1989 March 10; Opinion; Order; Published as: Panek v. Bagucz, 718 F. Supp. 1228 (D. N.J. 1989).
  • Parzen v. Petrie Stores Corp. 1989 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Patlex Corp. v. JEC Lasers 1989 November 27; Opinion; Order
  • People's Bank v. Estate of Romanelli 1989 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Powell v. Arvonio 1989 November 20; Opinion; Order
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Business Sys., Inc. 1989 October 10; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Rittenhouse v. Fauver 1989 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Ryan v. Burlington County 1989 March 06; Opinion; Order
  • Sahni v. Port Auth. 1989 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • Savage v. Federated Dep't Stores 1989 May 02; Opinion; Order; Amended Order (1989 May 02); Published as: Savage v. Federated Dep't Stores, No. 88-4444, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18129 (D. N.J. May 2, 1989).
  • Sayre v. Douglas Call Co. 1989 November 29; Opinion; Order
  • Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1989 November 06; Opinion; Order; Published as: Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., No. 84-4542, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18956 (D. N.J. June 22, 1989).
  • SDF Co. v. J.S. of Am., Inc. 1989 January 12; Opinion; Order; Order (1989 January 12); Order (1989 January 12)
  • Sgro v. Samna Corp. 1989 February 23; Opinion; Order
  • Share Corp. v. Stevens 1989 June 19; Opinion; Opinion; Order (1989 June 30)
  • Sharplan Lasers v. WR Air Serv. 1989 June 29; Opinion; Opinion; Order (1989 October 02)
  • Shumate v. Piezo Elec. Prod. 1989 April 27; Opinion; Order
  • Siciliano v. Div. of Youth & Family Serv. 1989 May 08; Opinion; Order
  • Stackhouse v. Rafferty 1989 November 16; Opinion; Order
  • Steinberger v. Ruggiero 1989 May 25; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1989 November 09)
  • Stiftung v. AmEuro Capital Corp. 1989 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • Strassman v. Natsnax 1989 October 05; Opinion; Order
  • Strickland v. Essex County 1989 June 16; Opinion; Order; In Forma Pauperis Application
  • Student Pub. Interest Research Group of N.J. v. Hercules 1989 April 06; Opinion; Order; Published as: Student Pub. Interest Research Group of N.J. v. Hercules, No. 83-3262, 1989 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16901 (D. N.J. Apr. 6, 1989).
  • Supac Sys. v. Fastrax 1989 May 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1989 June 14)
  • Thomas v. Terumo Corp. 1989 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Thompson v. Passaic County 1989 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • In re Tort 1989 January 19; Opinion; Order
  • Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund v. LPC Trucking 1989 June 28; Opinion; Order

Box 21:

  • 2175 Lemoine Ave. Corp. v. Finco 1989 April 27; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Tal 1989 April 21; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Branch 1989 March 20; Opinion; Exhibit A
  • United States v. Fiorentino 1989 September 25; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Gambino 1989 January 17; Letter-Opinion; Judgment and Probation Order; Order
  • United States v. Mejia 1989 September 25; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Pray 1989 February 14; Opinion
  • United States v. Qualified Enter. 1989 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Silberman 1989 August 15; Opinion; Order; Letter-Memorandum
  • United States v. Sinacori 1989 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • V.C. v. Hasbrouck Heights Bd. of Ed. 1989 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Waigand v. Equal Employment Opportunity Program 1989 July 19; Opinion; Order
  • Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. D'Annunzio Bros. 1989 May 19; Opinion; Order
  • Youngs v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1989 October 13; Opinion; Order

Series 8: Papers, 1990
Boxes 21-26:
All papers dated 1990. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 21:

  • Alaikim v. Kennedy 1990 July 02; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Algea v. Sullivan 1990 December 05; Opinion; Order
  • Allstate Ins. Co. v. Florio 1990 June 27; Opinion; Order
  • Am. Cyanamid Co. v. S.C. Johnson & Sons 1990 March 05; Letter-Opinion; Opinion; Order;
  • Banfield v. Middlesex County Adult Corr. Ctr. 1990 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • Bel-Art Prod. v. Nalge Co. 1990 April 27; Opinion; Order; Published as: Bel-Art Prod. v. Nalge Co., No. 89-4054, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 19333 (D. N.J. Apr. 27, 1990).
  • Berkner v. Epstein 1990 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Bi-Coastal Investors v. Westreich 1990 August 23; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Bowater Commc'n Papers v. Kirsinger 1990 November 02; Opinion; Letter; Brief; Order; Amended Order
  • Bysterbusch v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1990 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Carteret Indus. Project v. Gen. Ins. Co. of Trieste & Venice 1990 August 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Castro v. State 1990 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Chambers v. Derwinski 1990 September 14; Opinion; Order
  • Ciano v. American-Valve 1990 September 21; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • C&K Builders v. N.Y. Life Ins. Co. 1990 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Conoco v. Tank Barge Interstate 36 1990 March 28; Opinion; Order
  • Construction & Maintence Corp. v. PPD Prop. 1990 May 15; Opinion; Order

Box 22:

  • Control Air v. Am. Trans-Freight 1990 May 14; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Cooper v. Hera Res. 1990 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Corsi v. Sullivan 1990 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • CPC Int'l v. Int'l Ins. Co. 1990 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Di Felice v. Hoffmann-La Roche 1990 June 27; Opinion; Order
  • Dole v. Int'l Matex Tank Terminals 1990 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • Dole v. Int'l Union of Elec. Radio Workers, Local 427 1990 May 24; Opinion; Order
  • Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the U.S. v. Houston Gen. Ins. Co. 1990 March 28; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 May 18)
  • Elkins v. Spanoudis 1990 August 10; Opinion; Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1990 October 23; Opinion; Opinion; Order (1990 December 14)
  • Estate of Fiorilli v. N.J. Carpenters Health Fund 1990 April 26; Opinion; Order
  • Fasick v. Hilton 1990 January 23; Opinion; Order
  • Federowicz v. Arvonia 1990 May 18; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 August 06)
  • Fineman v. Armstrong World Indus. 1990 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • Firetek Corp. v. Nat'l Guardian Sec. Serv. Corp. 1990 May 11; Opinion; Order
  • First Fidelity Bank v. Parness 1990 February 16; Opinion; Order
  • Fleisher v. United States 1990 May 02; Opinion; Order; Letter (1991 January 29); Opinion, Third Circuit (1991 January 29)
  • Gen. Biscuit Brands v. R.K.D. Oil Co. 1990 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • Gibraltar Plastics Corp. v. United Textile Workers of Am. 1990 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Gilliens v. Wilentz 1990 May 09; Opinion; Order
  • Goldstein v. Windstream Int'l 1990 November 01; Opinion; Order
  • Noeller Indus. v. Tri-State Dev. Co. 1990 April 05; Opinion; Order
  • Hartigan v. Ins. Co. of N. Am. 1990 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • Hayward Indus. v. Cole Indus. 1990 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • Harris Corp. v. Int'l Rectifier Corp. 1990 November 26; Opinion; Order
  • Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Elizabethtown Gas Co. 1990 October 05; Opinion; Order
  • Henderson v. Beyer 1990 May 16; Opinion; Order
  • Hochman v. Fypon 1990 October 11; Opinion; Order
  • Hotel Employees Int'l Union Welfare Fund v. Pub of N.J. 1990 September 07; Opinion; Order [Cohen, Senior J.] [published]
  • Hunt v. Bellavia 1990 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp. v. Berenyi 1990 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • Integrity Ins. Co. v. Whaley 1990 September 20; Opinion; Order; Order (1990 September 20)

Box 23:

  • Israelsky v. J.C. Penny Co. 1990 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • Iwatsu Am. v. S. Telcom Corp. 1990 February 21; Opinion; Order
  • J&A Coffee v. Gloria Jean's Coffee Bean Franchising Corp. 1990 June 29; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1990 September 17); Order Denying Reargument and Renewal; Order
  • Jacobs v. Beyer 1990 March 08; Opinion; Order
  • James v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp. 1990 June 04; Opinion; Order
  • Jenkins v. Sullivan 1990 October 16; Opinion; Order
  • Kane Carpet Co. v. Ins. Co. of N. Am. 1990 March 27; Opinion; Order
  • Karolis v. Neubert 1990 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • Kaufman v. Hoffmann-La Roche, Inc. 1990 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Kemp v. Hous. Auth. of Passaic 1990 February 08; Opinion (court transcript)
  • Killinger v. Krack 1990 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • King Fisher Marine Serv. v. Hanson Dev. Co. 1990 June 04; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion (1990 June 06)
  • Knodel v. State 1990 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Kochana v. Bonnick 1990 December 11; Opinion; Order
  • Krowl v. United States 1990 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • Levinson v. Budd Foods 1990 June 15; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1990 August 23); Order
  • Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Jackson 1990 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Lombardi v. Hobart Mfg. Co. 1990 March 13; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Louis v. Foley Towlift, Inc. 1990 June 04; Opinion; Order
  • Lowitt v. Sullivan 1990 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Marketforce Holdings Co. v. Arkell 1990 March 28; Opinion; Judgment
  • Marotta Scientific Controls v. RLI Ins. Co. 1990 June 04; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1990 July 17); Order; Opinion (1990 October 16); Order; Published as: Marotta Scientific Controls v. RLI Ins. Co., No. 87-4438, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20167 (D. N.J. June 4, 1990).
  • Martinez v. United States 1990 May 31; Opinion; Order; Published as: Martinez v. United States, 743 F. Supp. 298 (D. N.J. 1990).
  • MCI Telecomm. Corp. v. Sutz 1990 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Melignano v. Roeslere 1990 September 25; Opinion; Order
  • Merola v. Prudential-Bache Sec. 1990 January 23; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion and Order (1990 January 30)
  • Merola v. Beyer 1990 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • McNeil v. Nat'l Football League 1990 June 12; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion (1990 July 03)
  • Miller v. Ahrenholz 1990 January 22; Opinion
  • Miller v. Sessions 1990 January 22; Opinion; Order)
  • Miller v. Nickolopoulos 1990 September 26; Opinion; Order
  • Millipore Corp. v. New Brunswick Scientific Co. 1990 May 24; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Morgran Stiftung v. AmEuro Capital Corp. 1990 December 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order

Box 24:

  • Morris v. Beyer 1990 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Morrison v. Sullivan 1990 July 10; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1990 August 13); Order
  • Moskowitz v. Ryan 1990 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • Mullis v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1990 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • Murphy v. Scheidemantel 1990 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Nat'l State Bank v. First City Nat'l Bank & Trust Co. 1990 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • New Brunswick Sav. Bank v. Nw. Mortgage Co. 1990 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Transit Corp. v. Spentonbush/Red Star Co. 1990 June 27; Opinion; Order
  • Nissei Elec. v. JV Distributing, Inc. 1990 June 13; Opinion; Order
  • Novembre v. Diehl 1990 March 08; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order Granting Summary Judgment (1990 April 17)
  • Pasternak v. Sullivan 1990 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Pellegrino v. Arvonio 1990 November 29; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Mid Jersey Trucking Indus., Local 701 v. Omni Funding Group 1990 February 15; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Garret E. Brown, Jr.); Order
  • Peterson v. Doe 1990 September 28; Opinion; Order
  • Phillips v. Beyer 1990 February 28; Opinion; Order
  • Plain v. Plain 1990 January 16; Opinion; Order
  • Porter v. Sullivan 1990 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Bus. Sys., Inc. 1990 April 01; Opinion; Order for Writ of Execution and Release of Registry Funds | Opinion (1990 April 20); Order; Order Approving Settlement Agreement (1989 September 25) (Order of U.S. Bankruptcy Judge Harold C. Abramson) | Opinion (1990 June 27) | Letter-Opinion (1990 September 13); Order
  • Reyner v. Grow Group 1990 April 24; Opinion
  • Ricardo Araya, Inc. v. Bel-Aire Ins. Co. 1990 April 18; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. City of Passaic 1990 February 21; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Maryanne Trump Barry); Order
  • Romac of Colorado v. Romac & Assoc. 1990 October 24; Opinion; Order
  • Rosa v. Resolution Trust Corp. 1990 December 05; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Fisher)
  • Ryan v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1990 February 27; Opinion; Order
  • Sandom v. Travelers Mortgage Serv. 1990 December 20; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Mitchell H. Cohen); Order
  • San Filippo v. Bongiovanni 1990 July 25; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Maryanne Trump Barry); Order

Box 25:

  • Sayre v. Douglas Call Co. 1990 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1990 August 23; Letter-Opinion; Order; Opinion | Opinion; Order (1990 December 17); Published as: Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., No. 84-4542, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20791 (D. N.J. Aug. 23, 1990); No. 84-4542, 1990 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20792 (D. N.J. Dec. 17, 1990).
  • Share Corp. v. Stevens 1990 July 17; Opinion; Order
  • Shephard v. Zelinski 1990 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Silverman v. CPC Chem. 1990 June 22; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1990 November 07)
  • Smith v. State 1990 August 03; Opinion; Order
  • Spencer v. Fauver 1990 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Spivey v. Stephens 1990 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Stackhouse v. Grier 1990 May 11; Opinion; Order
  • Strazdas v. Brady 1990 March 15; Opinion; Order
  • Sussex Drug Products Co. v. Kanasco 1990 February 22; Opinion; Judgment | Opinion; Order (1990 May 18)
  • Telepo v. Cardinale 1990 June 01; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Telepo v. Scheidemantel 1990 April 30; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Clarkson S. Fisher); Order
  • Terrell v. Soc. Sec. Admin. 1990 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • Timinski v. State 1990 June 07; Opinion; Order
  • Toombs v. Citicorp 1990 May 15; Opinion; Order
  • Travelers Indem. Co. v. Lab. Serv. 1990 November 09; Opinion; Order; Exhibit
  • Trewhella v. United States 1990 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • Tuxedo Beach Club Corp. v. City Fed. Sav. Bank 1990 October 31; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Mitchell H. Cohen); Order
  • Tyler v. Star Home Improvement Co. 1990 June 18; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1990 September 20); Order | Opinion (1990 November 09); Order
  • United States v. Acton Corp. 1990 March 28; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Garrett Brown)
  • United States v. Algon Chem. 1990 April 04; Opinion
  • United States v. Martinez 1990 November 14; Opinion; Order; Order
  • United States v. Mejia 1990 October 16; Opinion; Judgment in a Criminal Case; Order
  • United States v. Occidental Chem. Corp. 1990 November 19; Opinion; Order

Box 26:

  • United States v. Pieri 1990 October 23; Opinion
  • United States v. Pretlow 1990[no date]; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Harold A. Ackerman)
  • United States v. Ruth 1990 June 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 August 03)
  • United States v. Sanclemente 1990 June 06; Opinion; Writ of Habeas Corpus; Letter; Probation Order; Social Work Letter; Medical Examination Results; Prosecutor Letter; Defendant Letter; Exhibit; Order of Judgment
  • United States v. State 1990 July 26; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 October 26); Opinion; Order (1990 December 13)
  • United States v. Terminal Constr. Corp. 1990 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Torres 1990 April 18; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 October 01)
  • Volvo Transp. Corp. v. M/V Concert Express 1990 August 15; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1990 October 26)
  • Wakefield v. Samuels 1990 June 04; Opinion; Order
  • Walker v. United States 1990 October 26; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. La Polt 1990 November 19; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis order
  • Williams v. Zarick 1990 November 19; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis order
  • Wolken v. Hunter 1990 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Wright v. Craig 1990 November 27; Opinion; Order
  • Youngs v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1990 September 26; Opinion; Order
  • Youngman v. Peterson 1990 June 11; Opinion; Order
  • Zillmer v. Gross 1990 March 08; Opinion; Order

Series 9: Papers, 1991
Boxes 26-31:
All papers dated 1991. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 26:

  • Andrews v. County of Passaic 1991 May 14; Opinion; Order
  • Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. Lumbe 1991 April 29; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1991 July 17); Letter; Letter re: publication; Published as: Associated Metals & Minerals Corp. v. Lumbe, No. 90-2149, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21794 (D. N.J. Apr. 29, 1991).; No. 90-2149, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21795 (D. N.J. July 17, 1991).
  • Atlas Assurance Co. of Am. v. Emar Co. 1991 April 11; Opinion; Order
  • Banc Agricol I Commercial D'Andorra v. Reisner 1991 December 2; Opinion; Order
  • Bank of Tokyo Trust Co. v. Avalon Inv. Prop. 1991 October 22; Opinion; Order
  • Berger v. Humphreys 1991 August 19; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis order
  • Berkshire Corp. v. Texwipe Corp. 1991 January 29; Opinion; Order
  • Bi-Coastal Investors v. Westreich 1991 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Bd. of Tr. v. Centra 1991 October 17; Opinion
  • Bocchino v. Hartford Life & Accident Ins. Co. 1991 February 08; Opinion; Order
  • Brae Transp. v. Crossridge 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1991 August 13)
  • Brooks v. Beyer 1991 December 27; Opinion; Order

Box 27:

  • Brown v. Rafferty 1990 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Stephens 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1991 July 29; Opinion; Order
  • Calland v. Elizabeth 1991 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Cammarata v. United States 1991 May 23; Opinion; Order
  • Canady v. United States 1991 May 14; Opinion; Order
  • Carlisle Corp. v. Ace Wire & Cable Co. 1991 January 25; Opinion; Order
  • Connell Carroll v. Essex County 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Carteret Sav. Bank v. Office of Thrift Supervision 1991 April 25; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order; Published as: Carteret Sav. Bank v. Office of Thrift Supervision, 762 F. Supp. 1159 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • Castro v. Sullivan 1991 August 01; Opinion; Order
  • Ciano v. Am-Darling Valve 1991 April 17; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1991 July 18); Order
  • Cigna v. Boise 1991 July 29; Opinion; Order
  • Clark v. Goldstein 1991 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Coar v. Kazimir 1992 May 12; Opinion; Order (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Maryanne Trump Barry)
  • Conagra v. Woods 1991 October 29; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Worldwide Computer Serv. 1991 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Waterfront & Airport Comm'n 1991 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • De Jesus v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. 1991 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Di Felice v. Hoffmann-La Roche 1991 April 09; Opinion; Order
  • Doty v. Allstate Ins. Co. 1991 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • Duffy v. Liberty Mach. 1991 January 29; Opinion; Order
  • Dynatron/Bondo Corp. v. Clausen Co. 1991 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Elkins v. Spanoudis 1991 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the U.S. v. Houston Gen. Ins. Co. 1991 November 18; Letter-Opinion
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1991 March 01; Opinion; Order
  • Evans v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 1991 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Fair Oaks Hosp. v. Berg 1991 January 31; Opinion; Order

Box 28:

  • Faktor v. Am. Biomaterials Corp. 1991 May 28; Opinion; Order; Published as: Faktor v. Am. Biomaterials Corp., No. 90-2018, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11927 (D. N.J. May 28, 1991).
  • Fed. Sav. & Loan Ins. Corp. v. Halperin 1991 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Finkelstein v. N.J. Auto. Full Ins. Underwriting Ass'n 1991 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Fineman v. Armstrong World Indus. 1991 May 06; Opinion; Order; Published as: Fineman v. Armstrong World Indus., 774 F. Supp. 266 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • First Princeton Capitol Corp. v. Boulder Prod. 1991 February 21; Opinion; Order
  • Fraenkel v. State 1991 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Franklin v. Garrett 1991 April 08; Opinion; Order
  • Fykes v. McCreesh 1991 March 27; Opinion; Order
  • Gambocz v. McCallum 1991 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • In re Gioso 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Gladstone v. Vikonics 1991 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Golden City Bank v. Rutherford Commercial Corp. 1991 January 14; Opinion; Order
  • Grant v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co. 1991 October 16; Opinion; Order; Published as: Grant v. Coca-Cola Bottling Co., 780 F. Supp. 246 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • Grenell v. Dana 1991 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Grilk v. Goldstar Prod. Co. 1991 June 13; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Haider v. XL/Datacomp 1991 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Hamani v. Miggins 1991 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Hamani v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 1991 March 18; Opinion; Order; Application to Proceed in Forma Pauperis
  • Hassan v. Jamesway Corp. 1991 April 25; Opinion; Order
  • Hawke Assoc. v. City Fed. Sav. Bank 1991 May 22; Opinion; Order; Published as: Hawke Assoc. v. City Fed. Sav. Bank, 787 F. Supp. 423 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • Hayward Indus. v. Cole Indus. 1991 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Henderson v. Beyer 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Holmes v. Arvonio 1991 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Hughes v. Sea-Land Corp. 1991 January 04; Opinion; Order
  • Inamdar v. Shell Oil Co. 1991 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Ingersoll-Rand Fin. Corp. v. Anderson 1991 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Union v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • J.T. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1991 March 01; Opinion; Order
  • Jacobs v. Feinberg 1991 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Jacobsen v. Bell Commc'n Research 1991 April 12; Opinion; Order
  • Johanson v. Arvonio 1991 December 30; Order; Order
  • Kay v. Parsippany-Troy Hills Bd. Of Ed. 1991 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • Katz v. Peters 1991 June 12; Opinion; Order

Box 29:

  • Kemp v. Marguglio 1991 January 10; Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion (1991 January 11)
  • In re Keystone Camera Prod. Corp. 1991 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Lerman v. Joyce Int'l 1991 July 17; Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion (1991 November 15); Order (1991 November 18);
  • Littelfuse v. Bel Fuse, Inc. 1991 April 26; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Fed'n of Professional & Technical Eng'r, Local 195 v. Downs 1991 January 29; Opinion; Order
  • Longo v. Sullivan 1991 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Lopez v. Nickolopoulos 1991 March 12; Opinion; Order; Order
  • M.V. v. Glen Rock Bd. Of Ed. 1991 May 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: M.V. v. Glen Rock Bd. Of Ed., No. 90-2702, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21854 (D. N.J. May 21, 1991).
  • Mack Boring Parts Co. v. Moffitt 1991 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Maguire v. Arvonio 1991 July 23; Opinion; Opinion; Order (1991 August 13)
  • Malloy v. Turnamian 1991 September 19; Opinion; Opinion; Order (1991 October 30)
  • Manning v. Arvonio 1991 June 13; Opinion; Order
  • Manzo v. Sullivan 1991 December 18; Opinion; Order; Published as: Manzo v. Sullivan, 784 F. Supp. 1152 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • Martin v. Supermarkets Gen. Corp. 1991 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Mattson v. Union County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 1991 May 06; Opinion; Order
  • McGeachy v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Hudson 1991 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • McQueen v. Sullivan 1991 February 12; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis order (1991 January 29)
  • Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Jenkins 1991 May 10; Opinion
  • Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Lan Assoc. 1991 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Miller v. Plantier 1991 November 01; Opinion; Order
  • Monon Corp. v. Kelchner 1991 January 24; Opinion; Order
  • Morgran Stiftung v. AmEuro Capital Corp. 1991 March 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order; Order (1991 October 17)
  • Napolitano v. Sullivan 1991 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • New Breed Moving Corp. v. Quality Indus. Trucks 1991 October 26; Opinion; Order
  • New Brunswick Sav. Bank v. Nw. Mortgage Co. 1991 February 25; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1991 December 13)
  • N. E. Wall Sys. v. Glaziers & Glass Workers of the Int'l Bd. of Painters & Allied Trades, Local 1095 1991 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • Norwest Fin. Leasing v. B-copy, Inc. 1991 October 09; Opinion; Order
  • O'Keefe v. Sprout-Bauer, Inc. 1991 February 14; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1991 May 30); Opinion; Order (1991 June 24); Opinion; Order (1991 September 30)

Box 30:

  • Pasley v. Edmiston 1991 November 21; Opinion; Order
  • Pelio v. Garfield Hous. Auth. 1991 May 14; Opinion; Order
  • Players Int'l v. Kayo Cards 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Rauch v. All Metro Car Leasing 1991 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Reyner v. Grow Group, Inc. 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Bus. Sys. 1991 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Rittenhouse v. Fauver 1991 September 05; Opinion; Order
  • Roberts v. Arvonio 1991 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Robinson v. Fauver 1991 October 08; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order
  • Romac of Colo. v. Romac & Assoc. 1991 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Rosa v. City of Plaintified 1991 May 24; Opinion; Order
  • Rush v. Stephens 1991 October 08; Opinion; Order
  • Sacco v. G.D. Searle & Co. 1991 July 17; Opinion; Order
  • Schiavone Constr. Co. v. Impresit-Girola-Lodigiani, Inc. 1991 November 19; Opinion; Order
  • Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1991 February 05; Opinion; Order; Published as: Schoonejongen v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., No. 84-4542, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21571 (D. N.J. Feb. 5, 1991).
  • Schlam v. Maggio 1991 June 07; Opinion; Order
  • Shakoor v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 1991 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Siano v. Stephens 1991 August 19; Opinion; Order
  • Simmons v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Silva v. Paranto 1991 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Silverman v. CPS Chem. Co. 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Summit Trust Co. v. Bailey 1991 June 11; Opinion; Order
  • Symtron Sys. v. Aai Corp. 1991 December 23; Opinion; Order
  • Tara Realty v. Dir. 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Terry v. Arvonio 1991 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Tismo v. M/V Ippolytos 1991 March 28; Opinion; Order; Published as: Tismo v. M/V Ippolytos, 776 F. Supp. 928 (D. N.J. 1991).
  • Torres v. Hous. Auth. of Paterson 1991 May 23; Opinion; Order
  • Toussiant v. Dep't of the Treasury 1991 August 02; Opinion; Order; Published as: Toussiant v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 91-3150, 1991 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11275 (D. N.J. Aug. 2, 1991).
  • Transcon. Gas Pipe Line Corp. v. 1.37 Acres of Land 1991 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Gambino 1991 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Mitarotonda 1991 May 10; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order

Box 31:

  • United States v. Nwabuko 1991 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. State 1991 September 09; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Toys "R" Us 1991 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • In re Velis 1991 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Watkins v. Bausch & Lomb 1991 January 29; Opinion; Order
  • W. Union Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co. 1991 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Arvonio 1991 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Sullivan 1991 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Woods v. Newman 1991 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Zamboni v. Stamler 1991 April 25; Opinion; Order; Letter-Opinion; Order (1991 November 12)

Series 10: Papers, 1992
Boxes 31-35:
All papers dated 1992. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 31:

  • In re AAA Trucking Corp. 1992 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Aboo v. Malouf 1992 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • AFN v. Schlott 1992 July 14; Opinion; Order
  • Adeniji v. Rutgers Univ. 1992 April 16; Opinion; Order
  • Akron Packaging Mach. v. Farmland Dairies 1992 April 14; Opinion; order
  • Amland Properties Corp. v. Aluminum Co. of Am. 1992 December 21; Opinion [Maryanne Trump Barry, J.]
  • Andrews v. County of Passaic 1992 April 02; Opinion; Order
  • Andrian v. Murphy 1992 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • In re Art-Metal U.S.A. 1992 March 13; Opinion; Order
  • In re Art Metal-U.S.A. 1992 March 11; Opinion; Order
  • Bacon v. Sec. of Health & Human Serv. 1992 March 13; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1992 April 24); Published as: Bacon v. Sec. of Health & Human Serv., 786 F. Supp. 434 (D. N.J. 1992).

Box 32:

  • Barr Lab. v. Bolar Pharm. Co. 1992 July 13; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1992 December 23); Order; Published as: Barr Lab. v. Bolar Pharm. Co., No. 91-4374, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22882 (D. N.J. Dec. 23, 1992).; No. 91-4374, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22883 (D. N.J. July 13, 1992).
  • Beaumont Distrib. v. Shoei Safety Helmet Corp. 1992 November 03; Opinion; Order
  • Berkshire Corp. v. Texwipe Corp. 1992 August 06; Opinion; Order
  • Block Drug Co. v. Sara Lee Corp. 1992 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Bd. of Tr. v. Centra 1992 February 06; Opinion; Order
  • Brenner v. Philips, Appel, & Walden 1992 September 09; Opinion; Order
  • Brewery Workers' Union, Local 102 v. Anheuser-Busch 1992 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Bowater Commc'n Papers v. Kirsinger 1992 February 28; Opinion; Order
  • Burch v. Twp. of Chatham 1992 April 23; Opinion; Opinion [Antell, J.; Keefe, J.] (1991 March 08); Order(1992 April 23)
  • Burrascano v. Super. Ct. 1992 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • Bus. Funding Group v. Zawada 1992 July 21; Opinion; Order
  • Cammarata v. United States 1992 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • Camuso v. Webcraft Tech. 1992 March 06; Opinion; Order
  • Centennial Life Ins. Co. v. Gold 1992 November 25; Opinion; Order
  • Chalet v. Dep't of Immigration & Naturalization Serv. 1992 November 24; Opinion; Order
  • Choice v. Beyer 1992 December 16; Opinion; Order; Affadavit
  • Clarken v. United States 1992 February 19; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1992 September 11); Published as: Clarken v. United States, 791 F. Supp. 1029 (D. N.J. 1992).
  • Com-Rep v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1992 February 12; Opinion; Order
  • DeGraaff v. United States 1992 September 22; Opinion; Order
  • Deluca v. Merrell Dow Pharm. 1992 April 29; Opinion [Brown, J.]
  • In re Dell'Aquila 1992 September 11; Opinion; Order
  • Dellutri v. City of Elizabeth 1992 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • Dexter v. Cosan Chem. Corp. 1992 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Dow Chem. Co. v. Schaefer Salt & Chem. Co. 1992 July 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1992 July 20); Published as: Dow Chem. Co. v. Schaefer Salt & Chem. Co., No. 91-4027, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22908 (D. N.J. July 20, 1992).
  • Elkins v. Spanoudis 1992 March 13; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1992 July 20)
  • Ellen v. Advacare 1992 April 10; Opinion; Order; Amended Order (1992 April 14)
  • E.M. v. Teaneck Bd. of Ed. 1992 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1992 March 02; Opinion; Order
  • Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n v. Yellow Freight Sys. 1992 June 22; Opinion; Order

Box 33:

  • Evarts v. Vail-Deane Sch. 1992 March 03; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1992 September 28)
  • Extebank v. N.J. Econ. Dev. Auth. 1992 September 28; Opinion; Order; Summary Judgment Order
  • F. Von Langsdorff Licensing v. Grinnell Concrete Pavingstones 1992 June 12; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion (1992 November 10)
  • Estate of Fairweather v. United Textile Workers of Am., Local 283 1992 February 07; Opinion; Order
  • FDR Vending v. City of Paterson 1992 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Canter 1992 June 22; Opinion
  • Fogel v. Hous. Auth. of Passaic 1992 November 05; Opinion; Order
  • Fucilli v. Houghton 1992 August 10; Opinion; Order
  • Fukoku Kogyo Co. v. FKC Am. 1992 February 28; Opinion; Order
  • Genco v. Pepperidge Farm 1992 November 09; Opinion; Order
  • Gloria Jean's Coffee Bean Corp. v. Klein 1992 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Harrah v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co. 1992 November 06; Opinion; Order; Published as: Harrah v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., 809 F. Supp. 313 (D. N.J. 1992).
  • In re Heldor Indus. 1992 April 21; Opinion [Brown, J.]; Order
  • Hifonics Corp. v. Mark I Elec. Corp. 1992 June 18; Opinion; Order
  • Hill v. Passaic County Sheriff's Dep't 1992 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Hoyer v. Sontag 1992 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 522 v. Joule Maint. Corp. 1992 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Totally Physical, Inc. 1992 April 23; Opinion; Order
  • Kelly v. Rockefeller Group 1992 June 18; Opinion; Order; Published as: Kelly v. Rockefeller Group, No. 91-4004, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14957 (D. N.J. June 18, 1992).
  • KVL Systems v. Chuchla 1992 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • In re Koppel Photo Engraving Co. 1992 March 18; Opinion; Order;Opinion; Order Vacating Dismissal of Appeal (1992 May 07); Opinion (1992 October 26)
  • Lee v. Sullivan 1992 November 24; Opinion; Order
  • Lerman . Joyce Int'l 1992 September 14; Opinion; Order

Box 34:

  • Looney v. Elizabeth Hous. Auth. 1992 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • Luciano v. Johnson 1992 December 02; Opinion; Order
  • Maiorino v. Schering-Plough Corp. 1992 July 24; Opinion; Order; Opinion (hand-corrected copy) | Opinion (1992 August 24); Order
  • Malloy OBO Air Tech. v. Turnamian 1992 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • Martins v. Hydrotile Mach. Co. 1992 October 26; Opinion; Order
  • Maydet v. Yale New Haven Hosp. 1992 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Mercado v. Raymond Corp. 1992 April 14; Opinion; Order
  • Metro. Steel Indus. v. Seaboard Sur. Co. 1992 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Metro. Steel Indus. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. 1992 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Midlantic Bank v. Sourlis 1992 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Miller v. Ginsburg 1992 June 25; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. John C. Lifland)
  • Morici v. United States 1992 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Morgran Stiftung v. AmEuro Capital Corp. 1992 January 10; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1992 January 31); Order | Opinion (1992 May 01); Order | Opinion (1992 October 01); Order
  • Multimatic Corp. v. Watkins Motor Lines 1992 May 01; Opinion; Order
  • Muse v. Borsellino 1992 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • N. Am. Philips Corp. v. Columbia Assoc. 1992 November 18; Opinion; Order Granting Plaintiff's Motion and Directing Issuance of Writ of Attachment
  • Obregon v. County of Hudson 1992 April 15; Opinion; Order
  • Pantzer v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1992 October 23; Opinion; Order
  • Paramount Aviation Corp. v. Agusta 1992 September 28; Opinion; Order; Order (1992 February 25)
  • Pearlman v. Preservation Soc'y of Newport County 1992 February 25; Opinion
  • Poore v. Cincinnati Milacron Mktg. Co. 1992 May 05; Opinion; Order
  • Riche v. Arvonio 1992 February 25; Opinion; Order
  • Rizzo v. James Petrozello Co. 1992 April 29; Opinion
  • Rhinesmith v. Sullivan 1992 August 07; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Bus. Sys., Inc. 1992 November 06; Opinion; Order
  • Robinson v. Fauver 1992 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Roberson v. Connolly 1992 March 03; Opinion; Order

Box 35:

  • Roseme v. Int'l Bus. Mach.Corp. 1992 June 03; Opinion; Order; Published as: Roseme v. Int'l Bus. Mach.Corp., No. 89-1466, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17183 (D. N.J. June 3, 1992).
  • Route 37 Bus. Park Assoc. v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. 1992 September 15; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Anne E. Thompson)
  • Rutgers Univ. v. Nourse Farms 1992 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Sallustro v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 1992 September 08; Opinion; Order
  • Schettino v. Paradise Beach Inn 1992 March 13; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1992 September 04); Order; Published as: Schettino v. Paradise Beach Inn, No. 91-1928, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21899 (D. N.J. Mar. 12, 1992)
  • Schettino v. Paradise Beach Inn, No. 91-1928, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21899 (D. N.J. Mar. 12, 1992).
  • Silverman v. CPS Chem. Co. 1992 June 03; Opinion; Order
  • Skelton v. Solomon 1992 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Soto v. AVCO Fin. Serv. 1992 April 15; Opinion; Order
  • Source Serv. Corp. v. Johnson 1992 July 21; Opinion; Order for Preliminary Injunction
  • Sw. Adjusting Co. v. Underwriters Adjusting Co. 1992 June 24; Opinion; Order
  • Surgical Sys. & Instruments v. C.R. Bard, Inc. 1992 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Tak Fat Trading Co. v. LFI, Inc. 1992 January 23; Opinion; Order
  • Takuma v. Cocchia 1992 April 30; Opinion; Exhibit A (Judgment of Conviction); Order; Order
  • Teamsters Indus. Employees Welfare Fund v. Rolls-Royce Motor Cars 1992 February 11; Opinion; Order
  • Telebrands Direct Response Corp. v. Ovation Commc'n 1992 February 24; Opinion; Order; Published as: Telebrands Direct Response Corp. v. Ovation Commc'n, 802 F. Supp. 1169 (D. N.J. 1992).
  • Toussaint v. Dep't of the Treasury 1992 May 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: Toussaint v. Dep't of the Treasury, No. 91-3150, 1992 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8821 (D. N.J. May 21, 1992).
  • Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund v. Clayton Container Corp. 1992 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Bivolcic 1992 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Bell 1992 November 05; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Hardy 1992 June 10; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Koufos 1992 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • United Nat'l Ins. Co. v. MAM, Inc. 1992 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Wall v. United States 1992 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Wenher v. Man-Roland USA 1992 April 27; Opinion; Order
  • W. Union Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co. 1992 November 24; Opinion; Order

Series 11: Papers, 1993
Boxes 36-38:
All papers dated 1993. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 36:

  • AAA Trucking Corp. v. Joseph DiPasquale, Inc. 1993 March 17; Opinion; Order
  • Aboo v. Malouf 1993 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Aliagha v. United States 1993 September 21; Opinion; Order
  • Allocco v. Dep't of Human Serv. 1993 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • Andrews v. County of Passaic 1993 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • Applied Graphics Tech. v. Einzig 1993 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Baker v. Marzulla 1993 March 02; Opinion; Order
  • Bergfeld v. Muralo Co. 1993 March 16; Opinion; Order
  • Bishop v. Newark Airport Vista 1993 September 28; Opinion; Order
  • Bishy v. Secret Serv. 1993 August 31; Opinion; Order
  • Cochran v. Dep't of Corr. 1993 September 17; Opinion; Order
  • In re Custom Living Cmty. 1993 May 28; Opinion; Order
  • Dell'Aquila v. Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. 1993 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • Dell Contractors v. DiPiazza 1993 November 19; Opinion; Order
  • Diehl v. Franklin 1993 July 15; Memorandum (Memorandum of U.S.D.J. Garrett Brown); Order
  • Dixon v. Vantuno 1993 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Doherty v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund 1993 February 19; Opinion; Order
  • Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n v. Yellow Freight Sys. 1993 January 15; Opinion; Order
  • Evans v. Edison Park Fast Co. 1993 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Garidis 1993 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Blackwood Assoc. 1993 May 28; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Ingram 1993 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • Fineman v. Armstrong World Indus. 1993 July 29; Opinion; Order; Order | Opinion (1993 September 21); Published as: Fineman v. Armstrong World Indus., No. 84-3837, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17390 (D. N.J. July 29, 1993).
  • Gaydos v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. 1993 September 21; Opinion; Order
  • Gloria Jean's Coffee Bean Corp. v. Klein 1993 November 05; Opinion; Order
  • Grasse Custom Carpets v. Campbell 1993 July 16; Opinion; Order
  • Hall v. Cambria 1993 February 19; Opinion; Order
  • Hudson's Bay N.Y. v. Protection Mut. Ins. Co. 1993 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • Johnson v. Jersey City Police Dep't 1993 August 06; Opinion; Order
  • Johnson v. Lewis 1993 August 31; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Edminston 1993 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Joseph v. Foss 1993 February 03; Opinion; Order
  • J.R.W. v. Newark Bd. of Ed. 1993 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • In re Junquera 1993 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • JWP Energy Prod. v. Terminal Constr. Corp. 1993 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Kenny v. Anthony R. Davis Agency 1993 April 22; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Kolling v. Twp. of Monroe 1993 January 11; Opinion; Order

Box 37:

  • Kontos v. Kontos 1993 August 11; Opinion; Order
  • Koppel Photo Engraving Co. v. Michaels 1993 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Kramer v. Gen. Automation 1993 October 22; Opinion; Order
  • Mable-Vasquez v. United States 1993 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • In re Madison Indus. 1993 June 25; Opinion; Order (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Brown)
  • Maggio v. Sicard 1993 January 11; Opinion; Order
  • McFadden v. Englehardt 1993 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • McQuestion v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1993 July 23; Opinion; Order
  • Midatlantic Nat'l Bank v. Hansen 1993 January 06; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1993 June 08)
  • Morejon v. Beyer 1993 November 17; Opinion; Order
  • Morici v. United States 1993 February 19; Opinion; Order; Published as: Morici v. United States, No. 90-3310, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16814 (D. N.J. Feb. 19, 1993).
  • Morris v. Beyer 1993 September 01; Opinion; Order
  • Nelson v. Ferrier 1993 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Nestle Foods Corp. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. 1993 December 29; Opinion; Order (Opinion of U.S.D.J. Fisher)
  • N.J. State Council of Carpenters v. Architron Corp. 1993 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • In re New Valley Corp. 1993 January 28; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1993 June 04)| Opinion; Order (1993 November 05); Published as: In re New Valley Corp., No. 92-4884, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21420 (D. N.J. Jan. 28, 1993).; No. 92-4884, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21419 (D. N.J. June 4, 1993).; No. 92-4884, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21418 (D. N.J. June 7, 1993).
  • Nina v. United States 1993 May 19; Opinion; Order
  • N. Am. Philips Corp. v. Columbia Assoc. 1993 May 06; Opinion; Order
  • Okaro v. United States 1993 February 11; Opinion; Order
  • Oren v. Nat'l Westminster Bank 1993 March 09; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1993 June 25)
  • Pantzer v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1993 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • P.D.S. Prod. Dev. v. Chesapeake Fibre Packaging Corp. 1993 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Pereira v. Cerreto 1993 April 22; Opinion; Order
  • Perlmutter v. Cooper 1993 November 18; Opinion; Order
  • Powertex v. Insta-Bulk 1993 March 29; Opinion; Order
  • Praxis Int'l v. LCS Indus. 1993 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co. v. Sys. Council U-2 1993 November 17; Opinion; Order
  • Riether v. Ambase Corp. 1993 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Rivera v. Beyer 1993 August 31; Opinion; Order
  • Robinson v. Englehart 1993 September 01; Opinion; Order
  • Rodetsky v. Doe 1993 June 04; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion

Box 38:

  • Rodetsky v. Murphy 1993 October 08; Opinion; Order; Order |Opinion and Order (1993 November 19)
  • Sabia v. Newark Laborers' Annuity Fund 1993 January 20; Opinion; Order
  • Sardinha v. Lansing 1993 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • Schaffer v. Monomoy 1993 February 26; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1993 July 08)
  • Schenfele v. United States 1993 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Schettino v. Paradise Beach Inn 1993 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Sec'y of Labor v. Butler Serv. Group 1993 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Sec. Serv. v. Huls Am. 1993 March 05; Opinion; Order; Published as: Sec. Serv. v. Huls Am., No. 91-4825, 1993 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21237 (D. N.J. Mar. 5, 1993).
  • Short Hills Caterers v. Halpern 1993 April 23; Opinion; Order
  • Singh v. Bellcore 1993 September 07; Opinion; Order
  • Sw. Adjusting Co. v. Underwriters Adjusting Co. 1993 March 31; Opinion; Order
  • Stevelman v. Barricella 1993 August 09; Opinion; Order
  • Surgical Sys. & Instruments v. C.R. Bard, Inc. 1993 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • Teamsters Indus. Employees Welfare Fund v. Rolls-Royce Motor Cars 1993 September 02; Letter-Opinion; Final Judgment; Letter from Bennet D. Zurofsky, et al. to U. S. Court of Appeals (1993 May 15)
  • Thomas v. Nickolopoulos 1993 October 22; Opinion; Order
  • Timinski v. State 1993 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Allen-Collins 1993 February 17; Opinion; Order | Letter-Opinion; Order (1993 March 18)
  • United States v. Dworkin 1993 March 18; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A Financial Affidavit; Exhibit B Restitution Letter (1993 February 18);
  • United States v. Glover 1993 January 05; Opinion
  • United States v. Koufos 1993 September 01; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. One 1991 Alfa Romeo L64 1993 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Wexler 1993 November 01; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Vac-U-Pak v. Sparkomatic Corp. 1993 September 02; Opinion
  • Walker v. Plantier 1993 January 05; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis affidavit
  • Williams v. Montgomery Gateway E. Assoc. 1993 July 08; Opinion; Order

Series 12: Papers, 1994
Boxes 38-42:
All papers dated 1994. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

  • Arias v. Middlesex County Adult Corr. Ctr. 1994 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Arias v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1994 November 29; Opinion; Order
  • In re Arrow Carrier Corp. 1994 June 03; Opinion; Order
  • Atl. Employers v. Fed. Express Corp. 1994 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Bank of China v. Stewart Title Guar. Co. 1994 February 04; Opinion; Order

Box 39:

  • Barrino v. Beyer 1994 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Barsella v. State 1994 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Bates v. Foushee 1994 October 17; Opinion; Order
  • Bausch & Lomb v. Hudson Universal 1994 March 08; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 May 24) | Opinion; Order (1994 June 30)
  • Caffee v. Disabato 1994 December 08; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis affidavit (1994 November 08) | Opinion; Order (1994 December 21)
  • Chirino v. Super. Ct. 1994 January 07; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 July 15)
  • Corbett v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1994 September 23; Opinion; Order
  • Costa v. Hollingsworth-Vose Co. 1994 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Czawazka v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1994 October 18 Opinion; Order
  • Darin v. Shalala 1994 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Dornfeld v. CFTC Group 1994 September 20; Opinion
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. 180 Glenwood Owner's Corp. 1994 January 26; Opinion; Order
  • Flemmings v. Morton 1994 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Flynn v. Armeno 1994 October 19; Opinion; Order
  • Fredericks v. United States 1994 January 06; Letter-Opinion; Order; Account Statement Letters (1993 September 06); (1993 August 30)
  • Gambino v. United States 1994 November 15; Opinion; Order
  • Gamino v. Gen. Am. Life Ins. Co. 1994 February 25; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 June 17)
  • Gardner-Souza v. Percell 1994 June 23; Opinion; Order
  • Garden Spires Assoc. v. United States 1994 June 17; Opinion; Order
  • Gen. Ceramics v. Home Ins. Co. 1994 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Giancola v. Fauver 1994 May 06; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 August 04)
  • Gilson v. Pub. Defender's Office 1994 May 18; Opinion; Order; In forma pauperis affidavit
  • In re Gioioso 1994 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Goodwin v. County of Essex 1994 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Hankerson v. Alpha Meals 1994 December 01; Opinion; Plaintiff complaint (1993 October 15); Order granting summary judgment (1994 December 01); Order granting summary judgment (1994 December 01)
  • Highway & Local Motor Freight Drivers, Local No. 701 v. Carolina Freight Carriers Corp. 1994 October 18; Opinion; Order
  • Hodges v. Fauver 1994 June 20; Opinion; Order
  • Indus. Network Sys. v. Armstrong World Indus. 1994 January 21; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1994 February 08); Order |Opinion (1994 February 25); Notice of Motion (1994 February 16); Motion to Enforce Attorney's Lien (1994 February 16); Certificate of Service (1994 February 18); Brief in Support of Motion to Enforce Attorney's Lien (1994 February 16); Order (1994 February 25) | Opinion (1994 March 01); Order | Letter-Opinion (1994 April 06); Order
  • In re Integrated Equities, Inc. 1994 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Edminston 1994 June 28; Opinion; Order

Box 40:

  • Joyce v. RJR Nabisco Holdings Corp. 1994 May 02; Opinion; Order
  • Kesedar v. Sun Co. 1994 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Koren v. Beyer 1994 January 12; Opinion; Order
  • Kramer v. Gen. Automation 1994 November 14; Opinion; Order
  • Lahood v. Baldini 1994 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Lanza v. Crystall Commc'n 1994 April 27; Opinion; Order
  • Lalomia v. Dickstein, Shapiro, & Morin 1994 November 10; Opinion; Order
  • Leak v. Comey 1994 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Linnell v. Siemens Aktiengesellsschaft 1994 November 01; Opinion; Order
  • Llarena v. N. Bergen Post Office 1994 October 19; Opinion; Order
  • Llarena v. Miller 1994 June 14; Opinion; Order
  • Manna v. U.S. Dep't of Justice 1994 April 13; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 November 04)
  • Martin v. Arvonio 1994 April 18; Opinion; Order
  • McDonald v. Fauver 1994 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • McNeil v. Vt. Slate & Copper Serv. 1994 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Meagher v. United States 1994 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Merola v. Beyer 1994 February 08; Opinion; Order
  • Mitchell v. United States 1994 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • In re Mola 1994 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Moretti v. State 1994 March 07; Opinion; Order
  • Mosley v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1994 June 07; Opinion; Order
  • Moss v. United States 1994 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Murphy v. Ferguson 1994 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • Myrie v. Ranco 1994 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Natale v. State 1994 January 14; Opinion; Order
  • Natural Res. Def. Council v. U.S. Envtl. Prot. Agency 1994 September 21; Opinion; Order
  • Niedermaier v. Passaic County Super. Ct. 1994 May 18; Opinion; Order
  • N. Am. Philips Corp. v. Columbia Assoc. 1994 January 27; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1994 June 13); Order | Opinion (1994 June 16); Order

Box 41:

  • Oakwood Assoc. v. Resolution Trust Corp. 1994 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Outlet City, Inc. v. W. Chem. Prod. 1994 January 10; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1994 June 29); Order
  • Pasley v. Edminston 1994 December 05; Opinion; Order
  • Passaic Metal Prod. v. Lexington Ins. Co. 1994 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Pearle v. Budesheim 1994 March 24; Opinion; Order
  • Peia v. Police Dep't of Franklin 1994 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Perlmutter v. Cooper 1994 June 07; Opinion; Order | Opinion; Order (1994 August 23)
  • Pickett v. Essex County Jail 1994 June 23; Opinion; Order
  • Pierce v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 863 1994 January 12; Opinion; Order
  • Powertex v. Insta-Bulk 1994 November 03; Opinion; Order
  • Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Nicholson 1994 June 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Principal Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Nicholson, No. 93-433, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21750 (D. N.J. June 30, 1994).
  • Ramos v. Office of the Pub. Defender 1994 May 11; Opinion; Order
  • Rein v. Newton 1994 October 27; Opinion; Order
  • Roberson v. Grundy 1994 December 05; Opinion; Order
  • Robinson v. Reiss 1994 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Rodetsky v. Carlson 1994 April 07; Opinion; Order
  • Salaam v. Arvonio 1994 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • Sanchez v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1994 March 29; Opinion; Order
  • Sauro v. Motorola Corp. 1994 August 09; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1994 November 04); Order

Box 42:

  • Schaefer v. Fusco 1994 October 19; Opinion; Order
  • Schmidt v. Cohen 1994 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Schmidt v. Seagal 1994 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Serbin v. Innovo Group 1994 April 26; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1994 September 29); Order
  • Sharpton v. Passaic County Sheriff Dep't 1994 May 11; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1994 November 15; Opinion; Order
  • In re Snipes 1994 November 17; Opinion; Order; Order amending Opinion
  • Stancil v. Arvonio 1994 November 07; Opinion; Order
  • Summit Enter. v. W. Trucking, Inc. 1994 January 19; Opinion; Order
  • Surgical Sys. & Instruments v. C.R. Bard, Inc. 1994 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Sussex & Warren Holding Corp. v. State 1994 April 12; Opinion; Order
  • Taylor v. Englehardt 1994 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Teamsters-Employers Pension Fund, Local No. 945 v. T. Farese & Sons 1994 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Terrell v. Beyer 1994 November 02; Opinion; Order
  • Tucker v. Brennan 1994 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Ullrich v. Sears Roebuck & Co. 1994 March 31; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Austin 1994 May 18; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. LaBarck 1994 November 10; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Pakenham 1994 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Pieri 1994 July 25; Opinion
  • United States v. Spatola 1994 November 16; Opinion; Letter from Gerald Shur to Antonio Spatola (1992 April 14); Order (1994 November 16)
  • Wakefield v. Arvonio 1994 May 10; Opinion; Order
  • Wakefield v. Borough of North Plainfield 1994 July 29; Opinion; Order
  • Ware v. Michelman 1994 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • Weiss v. Mercedes-Benz of N. Am. 1994 February 24; Opinion; Order
  • West v. All Am. Sports 1994 October 14; Opinion; Order
  • Westinghouse Credit Corp. v. D'Annunzio 1994 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Wilson v. United States 1994 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Witco Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co. 1994 April 06; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1994 August 05); Order; Published as: Witco Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co., No. 93-4709, 1994 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20781 (D. N.J. Apr. 6, 1994).
  • Worsley v. U.S. Marshal Serv. 1994 October 13; Opinion; Order
  • Zarif v. Barbo 1994 October 19; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1994 December 05); Order

Series 13: Papers, 1995
Boxes 43-46:
All papers dated 1995. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 43:

  • Abadeer v. Arab Banking Corp. 1995 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • In re Alcon Demolition 1995 August 02; Opinion; Order
  • Alford v. Sec'y of the U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Serv. 1995 March 03; Opinion; Order; Published as: Alford v. Sec'y of the U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Serv., 934 F. Supp. 134 (D. N.J. 1995).
  • Alpine Lace Brands v. Kraft Foods 1995 October 31; Opinion
  • Arias v. Middlesex County Adult Corr. Ctr. 1995 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Bartell v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1995 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Best v. Morton 1995 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Boeglin v. Home Care Mgmt. Serv. 1995 November 21; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers, Local No. 52 1995 September 28; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A | Opinion (1995 December 27); Order; Amended Complaint
  • Buechel v. DePuy 1995 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Candelario v. J & S Ford P'ship 1995 September 29; Opinion; Order
  • Centennial Life Ins. Co. v. Gold 1995 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Cent. Mut. Ins. Co. v. Battaglia 1995 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Cooney v. Mullaney 1995 January 10; Opinion; Order
  • Crossroads Cogeneration Corp. v. Cooper Indus. 1995 September 29; Opinion; Order
  • Dammer v. Mercedes-Benz of N. Am. 1995 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • DeSalvo v. Sapolsky 1995 February 07; Opinion; Order
  • Doherty v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund 1995 December 29; Opinion; Order
  • Donnell v. Englehardt 1995 August 03; Opinion; Order
  • Durex, Inc. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local Union No. 97 1995 February 23; Opinion; Order
  • Evergreen Am. Corp. v. Pomeroy 1995 October 31; Opinion
  • Faison v. U.S. Parole Comm'n 1995 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • Farrakhan v. Arvonio 1995 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Garidis 1995 November 17; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Linda Court, Inc. 1995 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. 1995 October 31; Opinion; Order (x2)
  • Ferriol v. Allstate Ins. Co. 1995 January 18; Opinion; Order
  • Ford v. Shalala 1995 March 20; Opinion; Order (1995 March 21)
  • Franklin v. Pa. Truck Lines 1995 September 28; Opinion; Order
  • Frants v. CIT Group 1995 March 22; Opinion; Order

Box 44:

  • Gonzalez v. Hudson County Jail 1995 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Gramuglia v. Sender 1995 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Green v. Morton 1995 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Green v. Shalala 1995 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • Hakeem v. Fauver 1995 February 15; Opinion; Order
  • Holmes v. Wilson 1995 July 20; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 522 v. Joule Maint. Corp. 1995 February 07; Opinion; Order; Exhibit F; Complaint
  • Jacobs v. Stephens 1995 January 06; Opinion; Order | Opinion(1995 March 02); Order | Opinion(1995 May 25); Order
  • Jones v. Sec'y of the U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Serv. 1995 February 27; Opinion; Order
  • Kato v. Fauver 1995 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Keller v. Orix Credit Alliance 1995 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Kierstead v. Suter 1995 November 21; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A; Exhibit B; Exhibit C; Affidavit of Indigency; Exhibit H; Addendum to Affidavit of Indigency; Exhibit J
  • Kohn v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1995 May 05; Opinion; Order
  • Kramer v. United Ass'n of Journeymen & Apprentices 1995 September 29; Opinion; Order; Order Admitting Counsel Pro Hac Vice
  • Laborers Local Union No. 472 & 172 Welfare & Pension Funds v. Carbro Constr. Corp. 1995 July 13; Opinion; Order
  • Lagoey v. Immaculate Conception Ukrainian Catholic Church 1995 January 27; Opinion; Order
  • Levi v. Texaco Ref. & Mktg. 1995 August 02; Opinion; Order
  • Licata v. Ginnotti 1995 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • Liebeskind v. Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Eelman, & Dicker 1995 April 06; Opinion; Order | Opinion(1995 June 06); Order | Opinion(1995 June 15); Order
  • Linear Dynamics v. A.H. Harris & Sons 1995 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Limite v. Fauver 1995 March 13; Opinion; Order
  • Linnell v. Siemens Corp. 1995 January 11; Opinion; Order
  • Manis v. Twp. of Millburn 1995 January 12; Opinion; Order
  • Marcelle v. Motel 6 1995 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Marincas v. Lewis 1995 June 20; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A; Exhibit B
  • Martinez v. Butler 1995 May 01; Opinion; Order

Box 45:

  • Maymi v. Arvonio 1995 May 04; Opinion; Order
  • McKnight v. Ohio Cas. Ins. Co. 1995 March 30; Opinion; Order
  • MCI Telecomm. v. Costamar Travel Cruise & Tours 1995 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Medlinksy v. Matsushita Elec. Corp. 1995 October 24; Opinion (x2)
  • Microstar Computers v. Laptops, Etc. Corp. 1995 April 26; Opinion; Order
  • Moore v. Engleheart 1995 October 25; Opinion
  • Moretti v. State 1995 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • Mourad v. O'Halloran 1995 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • Muhammad v. Dep't of Corr. 1995 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • Munro v. Employee Benefit Plans 1995 March 02; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1995 August 17); Order
  • Nance v. City of Newark Police Dep't 1995 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Navarro v. Shalala 1995 June 14; Opinion; Order
  • N.P. v. Kinnelon Bd. of Ed. 1995 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. State Council of Carpenters v. Beta Contractors 1995 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Newport Assoc. Dev. Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co. 1995 March 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: Newport Assoc. Dev. Co. v. Travelers Indem. Co., No. 94-1514, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22010 (D. N.J. Mar. 21, 1995). 
  • Noorilly v. Betts Corp. 1995 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Oquendo v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1995 July 21; Opinion; Order
  • Ortiz v. City of New Brunswick 1995 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Pascarell v. Nat'l Office Supply Co. 1995 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Patel v. United States 1995 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Paterson v. Scherer 1995 January 19; Opinion; Order transferring case to Bankruptcy Court
  • Pierce v. Paul's Trucking Co. 1995 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Pierre v. Chater 1995 July 13; Opinion; Order
  • Pray v. Internal Revenue Serv. 1995 February 15; Opinion; Order
  • Price v. State 1995 July 08; Opinion; Order
  • Raine v. Worldvision Enter. 1995 October 31; Opinion
  • Ravenell v. Fallon 1995 February 15; Opinion; Order
  • Redfern v. Green 1995 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Reevy v. United States 1995 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Bus. Sys., Inc. 1995 June 01; Opinion; Exhibit A; Exhibit B; Exhibit C; Exhibit D; Order
  • Restrepo v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1995 February 06; Opinion; Order

Box 46:

  • Revell v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1995 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • Riether v. AmBase Corp. 1995 February 27; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Sec'y of the Dep't of Health & Human Serv. 1995 July 10; Opinion; Order
  • Santaita v. Shalala 1995 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Santiago v. Sec'y of the Dep't of Health & Human Serv. 1995 March 17; Opinion; Order
  • Santos v. Van Leeuwen Pipe & Tube Corp. 1995 October 31; Opinion (x2)
  • Serbin v. Innovo Group 1995 July 20; Opinion; Order
  • Sethi v. Southland Corp. 1995 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • Slapikas v. J.H. Cohn Software Assoc. 1995 January 19; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. United States 1995 October 24; Opinion
  • Spartan Inter-Trans Group v. Connor Container Express 1995 June 07; Opinion; Opinion
  • Starbare III Partners v. St. Lawrence Corp. 1995 July 05; Opinion; Order (x2)
  • Steele v. Vazquez 1995 November 07; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Woodbridge Twp. 1995 November 07; Opinion; Order
  • Sullivan v. Shalala 1995 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Telepo v. Whitman 1995 November 30; Letter-Opinion; Exhibit A; Order
  • Tobia v. Sec'y of the U.S. Dep't of Health & Human Serv. 1995 May 04; Opinion; Order
  • Transmodal Assoc. v. Leonard Lang Imp. 1995 September 22; Opinion; Order
  • Tucker v. United States 1995 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. All Shares of Stock of R.S. Cars 1995 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Berry 1995 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Okoro 1995 September 14; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Scarafile 1995 January 10; Opinion; Order
  • Weiss v. Mercedes-Benz of N. Am. 1995 May 11; Opinion; Order (x2); Published as: Weiss v. Mercedes-Benz of N. Am., 899 F. Supp. 1297 (D. N.J. 1995).
  • Williams v. N. State Prison 1995 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • Windsoft v. Intercon Sys. 1995 September 22; Opinion; Order; Published as: Windsoft v. Intercon Sys., No. 95-1858, 1995 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21294 (D. N.J. Sept. 22, 1995).  
  • Witco Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co. 1995 February 01; Opinion; Order | Opinion (1995 May 02); Order
  • Wood v. Qudeen 1995 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Zarif v. Barbo 1995 March 22; Opinion; Order

Series 14: Papers, 1996
Boxes 47-50:
All papers dated 1996. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 47:

  • Abdulsamad v. State 1996 July 17; Opinion; Order
  • Alpine Lace Brands v. Kraft Foods 1996 March 21; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1996 September 20)
  • Annun v. Orval Kent Foods Co. 1996 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Artistic Doors & Windows v. Artistic Window & Door 1996 July 19; Opinion; Order
  • Bender v. Chater 1996 July 30; Opinion; Order
  • Boguslavsky v. Hosman 1996 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Boettcher v. Chater 1996 March 04; Opinion
  • Brown v. Foster 1996 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Carvajal v. Transport Workers Union Local 1400 1996 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Centennial Life Ins. Co. v. Gold 1996 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Chalkias v. Monarch Life Ins. Co. 1996 October 18; Opinion; Order
  • Christian v. Latimer 1996 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • Chubb & Son v. Cerbone 1996 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • C.M. v. Bd. of Ed. of Union County 1996 May 03; Opinion; Opinion (1996 July 29); Meeting Notes; Order; Amended Opinion
  • In re Coin-Telecomm. 1996 November 20; Opinion; Exhibit I; Financing Statement (1996 September 20); Order (1996 November 20); Published as: In re Coin-Telecomm., No. 96-2155, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 22665 (D. N.J. Nov. 20, 1996).  
  • Cuttitta v. Guzman 1996 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Daniels v. Thomas & Betts Corp. 1996 October 17; Opinion; Order
  • Dempsey v. Sohl 1996 August 02; Opinion; Order to proceed In Forma Pauperis
  • Depuy v. Biomedical Eng'g Trust 1996 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Doering v. Copper Mountain Ski Resort 1996 August 06; Opinion; Order of Transfer
  • Donnelly v. N.J. Highway Auth. 1996 February 07; Opinion; Order
  • Drisco v. Poncho 1996 May 15; Opinion; Order
  • Dynasty Fine Oriental Rugs v. Merchants & Business Men's Mut. 1996 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1996 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Evergreen Am. Corp. v. Reno 1996 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Garidis 1996 February 20; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Nat'l Union Fire Ins. Co. 1996 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Progressive Cas. Ins. Co. 1996 January 18; Opinion; Order
  • First Interregional Advisors Co. v. Scherers Commc'n 1996 February 01; Opinion; Order
  • Fischman v. Margolis 1996 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Flemmings v. Morton 1996 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Ford v. Brooks-Sloate Terrace Coop. Ass'n 1996 March 18; Opinion; Order
  • Fuller v. Town of Dover 1996 May 30; Opinion; Order

Box 48:

  • Gallant v. Telebrands Corp. 1996 March 04; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1996 May 03)
  • Gambino v. Morris 1996 April 11; Opinion; Order
  • Garcia v. Morton 1996 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • George v. Fava 1996 April 12; Opinion; Order
  • Glebar Co. v. Royal Master Grinders 1996 March 22; Opinion; Order; Published as: Glebar Co. v. Royal Master Grinders, No. 96-403, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13041 (D. N.J. Mar. 22, 1996).
  • Goldfarb v. Cunard Lines 1996 January 26; Opinion; Letter; Letter; Proposed Order; Opinion; Order (1996 April 08)
  • Goldman v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 1996 July 31; Opinion; Order Granting Motion to Remand
  • Grabner v. John Alden Life Ins. Co. 1996 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Green v. Morton 1996 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Hampton v. O'Leary 1996 March 08; Opinion; Order
  • Herrera v. Barbo 1996 August 06; Opinion; Order
  • Holmes v. Runyon 1996 April 01; Opinion; Order
  • Indus. Network Sys. v. Armstrong World Indus. 1996 April 17
  • Isaacs v. Frost 1996 January 24; Opinion; Order
  • J. I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1996 August 26; Opinion; Order
  • Joyce v. RJR Nabisco Holding Corp. 1996 June 13; Opinion; Order
  • Keep v. Children's Aid & Adoption Soc'y of N.J. 1996 March 19; Opinion; Order
  • Kenny v. Anthony R. Davis Agency 1996 September 03; Opinion; Order
  • Kuczynski v. Daxton Indus. 1996 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • LaNeve v. W. Milford Med. Ctr. 1996 May 30; Opinion; Order; Order (1996 June 06)
  • Linear Dynamics v. A.H. Harris & Sons 1996 February 08; Opinion; Order
  • Llarena v. Soc. Sec. Admin. 1996 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Marchitto v. Connelly 1996 July 12; Opinion; Order and Preliminary Injunction
  • Manning v. D'Alessio 1996 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Marrero v. Rettenburg 1996 March 11; Opinion; Order
  • In re McCormack 1996 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Melvin v. State 1996 March 05; Opinion; Order
  • Metro. Life Ins. Co. v. Brose 1996 August 30; Opinion; Order
  • Metzler v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. 1996 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Miscik v. Chater 1996 July 16; Opinion; Order
  • Molnar v. Sears Roebuck & Co. 1996 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Morris v. Davidson 1996 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Moss v. United States 1996 April 08; Opinion; Order
  • Mulligan v. Delicato Vineyards 1996 February 02; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1996 March 18); Published as: Mulligan v. Delicato Vineyards, No. 95-3281, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10080 (D. N.J. Feb. 2, 1996).
  • Murphy v. Enesco Corp. 1996 June 05; Opinion; Order

Box 49:

  • Nance v. City of Newark Police Dep't 1996 January 03; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Turnpike Ass'n v. PPG Indus. 1996 March 06; Opinion; Order; Order
  • New Valley Corp. v. Lexington Ins. Co. 1996 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Obiukwu v. State 1996 July 18; Opinion; Order
  • Ortiz v. City of New Brunswick 1996 February 20; Opinion; Order
  • Old Bridge Owners Coop. Corp. v. Twp. of Old Bridge 1996 March 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1996 June 13); Order; Opinion (1996 July 23); Order; Opinion (1996 January 11); Order; Published as: Old Bridge Owners Coop. Corp. v. Twp. of Old Bridge, 914 F. Supp. 1059 (D. N.J. 1996).   
  • Pierce v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 863 1996 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • Pray v. Internal Revenue Serv. 1996 July 31; Opinion; Order; Published as: Pray v. Internal Revenue Serv., No. 95-794, 1996 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 11643 (D. N.J. July 31, 1996).
  • Quintana v. Arvonio 1996 January 03; Opinion; Order
  • Rajin v. United States 1996 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • Rand McNally & Co. v. Lang 1996 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Reyes v. Morton 1996 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Richardson v. Mike 1996 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Chater 1996 July 19; Opinion; Order
  • Rutkowski v. Middlesex Borough Police Dep't 1996 January 11; Opinion; Order
  • Rycoline Prod. v. C&W Unlimited 1996 November 20; Opinion; Order
  • Saltzman v. Ceco Filters 1996 March 06; Opinion; Order
  • Sayyed v. LSG/SKY CHEFS 1996 December 31; Opinion; Order
  • Schnorrbush v. United States 1996 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Schreiber Foods v. Am. Nat'l Fire Ins. Co. 1996 April 01; Opinion; Order
  • Seidenbaum v. Cont'l Airlines 1996 January 29; Opinion; Order
  • Steele v. Vazquez 1996 February 28; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Woodbridge Twp. 1996 April 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1996 November 07); Order; Opinion (1996 November 13); Order; Opinion (1996 November 08); Order

Box 50:

  • Stretch Devices v. Charles M. Jessup, Inc. 1996 May 03; Opinion
  • Tarczynski v. Fauver 1996 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Town v. Bausch & Lomb 1996 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Transmodal Assoc. v. Leonard Lang Imp. 1996 February 20; Opinion; Order
  • Trump Taj Mahal Assoc. v. DCA 1996 July 25; Opinion; Order
  • In 2175 Lemoine Ave. Corp. 1996 October 25; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Ahkami 1996 February 20; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Carlson 1996 January 23; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1996 February 28)
  • United States v. One 1993 Porsche 911 Cabriolet Auto. 1996 August 05; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Lebowitz 1996 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Stansfield 1996 September 11; Opinion (Opinion of U.S.C.J. Cowen)
  • United States v. Wright 1996 August 05; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Vitiello v. Paton 1996 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Winstead v. State 1996 October 24; Opinion; Order
  • Worldlink Logistics v. Nat'l Shipping Co. of Saudi Arabia 1996 October 03; Opinion; Order
  • Witco Corp. v. Travelers Indem. Co. 1996 April 19; Opinion; Order
  • W.P. v. Poritz 1996 March 15; Opinion; Order Certifying a Class; Opinion; Order (1996 July 01); Order Amending Opinion (1996 July 02); Published as: W.P. v. Poritz, 931 F. Supp. 1187 (D. N.J. 1996).
  • Zenith Lab. v. Abbott Lab. 1996 August 05; Opinion; Order

Series 15: Papers, 1997
Boxes 51-54:
All papers dated 1997. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 51:

  • Abrams v. Comm'r 1997 October 20; Opinion; Order
  • Alpine Lace Brands v. Kraft Foods 1997 April 10; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1997 July 11); Order; Opinion (1997 September 23); Order
  • Amloid Corp. v. Moose Mountain Mktg. 1997 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • Appalachian Ins. Co. v. Port Auth. 1997 March 17; Opinion; Order
  • Askander v. Pressler & Pressler 1997 April 02; Opinion; Order
  • Awad v. State 1997 January 22; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Aziz v. Dep't of Corr. 1997 January 21; Opinion; Order
  • Barclay v. County of Middlesex 1997 October 23; Opinion; Order
  • Bass v. Kossup 1997 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • Bishop v. Maersk 1997 April 10; Opinion; Order
  • Boatman v. State 1997 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Boguslavsky v. Hosman 1997 August 18; Opinion; Order
  • Bosch v. Chater 1997 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Bush Boak Allen v. Clearly Canadian Beverage Corp. 1997 April 03; Opinion; Order
  • Carvajal v. Transport Workers Union Local 1400 1997 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Centennial Life Ins. Co. v. Gold 1997 March 21; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1997 June 03); Opinion; Order (1997 August 18); Order Amending Opinion (1997 September 04)
  • In re Checkwood 1997 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Chubb & Son v. Cerbone 1997 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Ciardi v. De Maria 1997 October 20; Opinion; Attorney Letter; Attorney Letter
  • Chiloro v. Ross 1997 February 26; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Copelco Capital v. Mitchell Co. 1997 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Cray v. City of Elizabeth 1997 December 02; Opinion; Order
  • Crossroads Cogeneration Corp. v. Orange & Rockland Util. 1997 June 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Crossroads Cogeneration Corp. v. Orange & Rockland Util., 969 F. Supp. 907 (D. N.J. 1997).
  • Damon v. United States 1997 October 09; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Denman v. N.J. Transit 1997 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Dompor v. Citibank 1997 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1997 November 06; Opinion; Order
  • Estrada v. Comm'r 1997 December 12; Opinion; Order

Box 52:

  • Eubank v. Portside Apartments Urban Renewal Co. 1997 April 09; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1997 November 12); Opinion; Order (1997 August 14)
  • Fallon v. Marxen 1997 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. v. Garidis 1997 March 25; Opinion; Order
  • Feidt v. Owens Corning Fiberglass 1997 January 06; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • In re Ford Motor Co. Ignition Switch Prod. Liab. Litig. 1997 September 30; Opinion; Order [Simandle, J.]
  • Fraternal Order of Police v. City of Newark 1997 July 29; Opinion; Exhibit A; Exhibit B
  • Gallo v. Reich 1997 October 20; Opinion; Order
  • Estate of Gibbs v. United States 1997 August 12; Opinion; Decision-Order (1997 October 29); Published as: Estate of Gibbs v. United States, No. 96-685, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23359 (D. N.J. Aug. 12, 1997).
  • Hallas v. Kral 1997 September 16; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. County of Hudson 1997 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • Hawkins v. Mobilemedia 1997 March 31; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Holquin v. United States 1997 April 07; Opinion; Order
  • Hook v. Transaction Publishers 1997 March 17; Opinion; Order
  • In re Hudson Gate II Apartments Corp. 1997 June 23; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Longshoremen's Ass'n Local 1478-2 v. Pittston Warehouse Corp. 1997 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Interstate Consol. Serv. v. Team Express 1997 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • J.I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1997 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • Joyce v. RJR Nabisco Holdings Corp. 1997 December 23; Opinion; Order
  • Kennedy Funding v. Upland Dev. 1997 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • KIA Heavy Indus. Corp. v. Contempo Design 1997 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Knight v. Lewis 1997 November 14; Opinion; Order
  • L.R. v. N. Plainfield Bd. of Ed. 1997 September 15; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1997 November 07)
  • Larry Tucker, Inc. v. Husky Envelope Prod. 1997 July 22; Opinion; Order
  • Lebel Realty v. Twp. of Mahwah 1997 August 07; Opinion; Order; Exhibit
  • Leonard Studio Equip. v. Desmar Corp. 1997 July 10; Opinion; Order; Appendix A
  • Lexington Ins. v. Diamond State Ins. Co. 1997 October 16; Opinion; Order
  • Linnen v. Kerness 1997 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Little v. G.E. Capital Mortgage Serv. 1997 July 22; Opinion; Order
  • Loftiss v. Borough of Palisades Park 1997 June 04; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Order
  • Louis v. City of East Orange 1997 September 23; Opinion; Order; Opinion (1997 October 16); Order
  • Mackerley v. Percudani 1997 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • Mainenti v. Servicemaster Co. 1997 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Mainenti v. Sukennikoff 1997 February 20; Opinion; Order
  • Mansol Assoc. v. Mansol Indus. 1997 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Martin v. Comm'r 1997 November 03; Opinion; Order
  • Mazzei v. Liberty-Kenworth-Hino Truck Sales 1997 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • Mercedes v. Morton 1997 April 07; Opinion; Order
  • Mette v. Egles 1997 November 07; Opinion; Order to proceed in forma pauperis (1997 November 06)
  • Metzler v. Westinghouse Elec. Corp. 1997 May 07; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Miwon Am. v. Ex-Im Plastics 1997 January 07; Opinion; Order
  • Murphy v. Enesco Corp. 1997 October 21; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Psychological Ass'n v. MCC Behavioral Care 1997 September 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: N.J. Psychological Ass'n v. MCC Behavioral Care, No. 96-3080, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16338 (D. N.J. Sept. 15, 1997).
  • Noire v. Givaudan-Roure Corp. 1997 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Noorily v. Thomas & Betts Co. 1997 June 04; Opinion; Order
  • Obiukwu v. State 1997 November 10; Opinion; Order
  • Ohrid v. Megasafe Indus. 1997 May 09; Opinion; Order
  • Old Bridge Owners Coop. Corp. v. Twp. of Old Bridge 1997 March 13; Letter-Opinion; Exhibit A; Opinion; Order (1997 July 31); Opinion; Order (1997 October 29); Published as: Old Bridge Owners Coop. Corp. v. Twp. of Old Bridge, 981 F. Supp. 884 (D. N.J. 1997).
  • O'Neill v. Allmerica Inst. Serv. 1997 January 16; Opinion; Order
  • Ortiz v. Baker & Taylor 1997 May 08; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Order
  • Ortiz v. Comm'r 1997 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Paramount Aviation Corp. v. Agusta 1997 April 04; Opinion; Order
  • Phone Express v. Pub. Switch Corp. 1997 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • Polk v. Dobbs Int'l Serv. 1997 February 24; Opinion; Order

Box 54:

  • Pray v. United States 1997 December 09; Opinion; Order
  • Ribeiro v. DelColle 1997 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Roland v. Comm'r 1997 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Santana v. Comm'r 1997 November 19; Opinion; Order
  • Sarullo v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1997 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Schneider & Marquard v. Nanticoke Micro Tech. 1997 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Seeward v. Frieder 1997 September 15; Opinion; Order
  • Seibert v. Nusbaum, Stein, Goldstein, Bronstein & Compeau 1997 August 20; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1997 December 31)
  • Shamsid-Deen v. Twp. of Scotch Plains 1997 August 01; Letter-Opinion; Order
  • Shamsid-Din v. Arvonio 1997 January 07; Opinion; Order
  • Sightyet Inv. v. Golden Line Freight Forwarder Co. 1997 August 11; Opinion; Order
  • Slapikas v. Cerasia 1997 February 26; Opinion; Order; Order Awarding Attorneys' Fees, Expenses, Etc. (1997 April 25)
  • Sook Son v. State Farm Ins. Co. 1997 July 24; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion and Order (1997 August 07)
  • Starbare III Partners v. Richardson 1997 November 14; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1997 December 31); Exhibit A
  • Status Int'l v. M & D Mar. 1997 November 20; Opinion; Order
  • Stone Container Corp. v. Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 560 1997 October 08; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Young 1997 August 20; Opinion; Order
  • Stretch Devices v. Charles M. Jessup, Inc. 1997 January 03; Opinion; Order
  • Swint v. Fed. Parole Bd. 1997 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • Tarrabocchia v. Comm'r 1997 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Terrafranca v. Virgin Atl. Airways 1997 January 17; Opinion; Order; Published as: Terrafranca v. Virgin Atl. Airways, No. 96-976, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 3259 (D. N.J. Jan. 17, 1997).
  • Thomas v. United States 1997 August 18; Opinion; Order
  • Thompson v. Corestates Fin. Corp. 1997 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • True v. Hakin 1997 October 28; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Miles 1997 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Vacca v. Grover 1997 November 06; Opinion
  • Wakefield v. Fauver 1997 April 10; Opinion; Order
  • Worsley v. U.S. Marshal Serv. 1997 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Zenith Lab. v. Abbott Lab. 1997 October 01; Opinion; Order; Published as: Zenith Lab. v. Abbott Lab., No. 96-1661, 1997 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23954 (D. N.J. Oct. 1, 1997).

Series 16: Papers, 1998
Boxes 55-59:
All papers dated 1998. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 55:

  • Abdul-Aliim v. State 1998 February 12; Opinion; Order
  • Advanced Web Creations v. Apex Global Internet Serv. 1998 October 06; Opinion; Order
  • Alvarez v. Dep't of Corr. 1998 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Amalgamated Transit Union Local No. 1541 v. Ace Bus Transp. Corp. 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order [incorrectly titled "Opinion"]; Opinion; Order (1998 September 04)
  • Balisnomo v. Pinchak 1998 April 16; Opinion; Order
  • Boguslavsky v. Hosman 1998 January 13; Opinion; Order Ι Opinion; Order (1997 August 17)
  • Bostic v. N.J. Ins. Underwriting Ass'n 1998 August 31; Opinion; Order
  • Bravo v. Appel 1998 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Brennan v. Novartis Pharm. 1998 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. United States 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • Bryant v. Morton 1998 August 07; Opinion; Order Ι Opinion; Order (1998 March 30)
  • Carvajal v. Lewis 1998 March 25; Opinion; Order
  • C.M. v. Bd. of Ed. of Union County 1998 November 10; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Colwell v. Gemini Consulting 1998 October 30; Opinion; Order
  • Cosmetic Group v. Zegarelli Group Int'l 1998 August 05; Opinion; Order Ι Opinion; Order (1998 November 30)
  • Crowley v. Anheuser-Busch 1998 January 27; Opinon; Order
  • Daewoo Int'l v. Sea-Land Orient 1998 May 27; Opinion; Order; Published as: Daewoo Int'l v. Sea-Land Orient, 32 F. Supp. 2d 705 (D. N.J. 1998).
  • Dainoski v. Witco Corp. 1998 April 22; Opinion; Order
  • Danka Funding Co. v. Mitchell Co. 1998 June 04; Opinion; Order Ι Opinon; Order (1997 December 15)
  • Delbono v. County of Middlesex 1998 January 12; Opinion; Order Ι Order (1998 October 13)
  • DeMaria v. Home Depot 1998 March 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: DeMaria v. Home Depot, No. 97-5987, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23070 (D. N.J. Mar. 30, 1998).
  • Diaz v. Comm'r 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • Disla v. Comm'r 1998 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Du v. Hibernia Post Office 1998 February 17; Opinion; Order
  • Eubank v. Portside Apartments Urban Renewal Co. 1998 January 28; Opinion; Order Ι Opinion; Order (1998 August 28) Ι Opinion; Order (1998 August 31)
  • Falconieri v. Eden 1998 August 06; Opinion; Order

Box 56:

  • Farrow v. Chrysler Corp. 1998 May 20; Opinion; Order
  • Frazier Indus. Co. v. Eastcore 1998 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Garcia v. Comm'r 1998 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Estate of Gibbs v. United States 1998 January 13; Opinion; Order; Published as: Estate of Gibbs v. United States, No. 96-685, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1312 (D. N.J. Jan. 12, 1998).
  • Gilmore v. Pinchak 1998 October 02; Opinion; Order
  • Gomar Mfg. Co. v. Novelli 1998 January 28; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 March 24); Opinion; Order (1998 April 13); Published as: Gomar Mfg. Co. v. Novelli, No. 96-4000, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23452 (D. N.J. Apr. 13, 1998).; No. 96-4000, 1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23453 (D. N.J. Mar. 24, 1998).
  • Gonzalez v. Guinther 1998 October 23; Opinion; Order
  • Grabner v. John Alden Life Ins. Co. 1998 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • Grissom v. Blackwell 1998 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Guibilo v. United States 1998 June 18; Opinion; Order
  • Guzman v. Baltimore Life 1998 October 27; Opinion; Order
  • Holy Name Friary v. Borough of East Rutherford 1998 April 21; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Longshoreman's Ass'n, Local 1478-2 v. Hudson Refrigerating Co. 1998 November 02; Opinion; Order
  • Ipcja v. McDonough 1998 March 10; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. Pinchak 1998 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • Kato v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. 1998 March 24; Opinion; Order
  • Kierstead v. Suter 1998 January 08; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A; Opinion; Order (1998 March 10)
  • Kim v. New England Mut. Life Ins. Co. 1998 August 11; Opinion; Order
  • Kocses v. Home Depot 1998 May 28; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 July 30)
  • In re Larkin 1998 May 22; Opinion; Order
  • Larosiliere v. Morton 1998 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • List v. Morton 1998 September 30; Opinion; Order

Box 57:

  • Lodato v. United States 1998 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Mann v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1998 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • Miles v. United States 1998 January 28; Opinion; Order
  • Morales v. Morton 1998 April 13; Opinion; Order
  • Morgran Stiftung v. AmEuro Capital Corp. 1998 October 23; Opinion; Order for Summary Judgment
  • Muhammad v. Green 1998 April 16; Opinion; Order
  • Mujahid v. Morton 1998 March 24; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 August 10)
  • Murphy v. Port Auth. 1998 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • Navieras NPR v. AZ Carriers 1998 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. State Council of Carpenters v. Bay Ridge Constr. 1998 February 20; Opinion; Order; Exhibit 1
  • N.J. Turnpike Auth. v. PPG Indus. 1998 May 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: N.J. Turnpike Auth. v. PPG Indus., 16 F. Supp. 2d 460 (D. N.J. 1998).
  • Noire v. Givaudan-Roure Corp. 1998 February 02; Opinion; Order
  • Old Bridge Owners Coop. Corp. v. Twp. of Old Bridge 1998 August 07; Opinion; Order
  • O'Neal v. Pinchak 1998 July 10; Opinion; Order
  • Osteotech v. Gensci Regeneration Sci. 1998 May 04; Opinion; Order; Order Amending Opinion (1998 May 27); Published as: Osteotech v. Gensci Regeneration Sci., 6 F. Supp. 2d 349 (D. N.J. 1998).
  • Owen v. WWOR-TV 1998 March 20; Opinion; Order
  • Padillo v. Apfel 1998 August 26; Opinion; Order
  • Paramount Aviation Corp. v. Agusta 1999 June 26; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 July 22)
  • P.C. Help Serv. v. Graham 1998 July 13; Opinion; Order
  • Pearce v. Invisible Fence Co. 1998 March 17; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 May 15)
  • Peavy v. Brown 1998 May 19; Opinion; Order

Box 58:

  • Perez v. Citicorp Individual Banking Group 1998 March 03; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 November 09)
  • Perez v. United States 1998 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Perry v. County of Monmouth 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • Philadelphia Produce Credit Bureau v. Jersey Produce Co. 1998 February 04; Opinion; Order Granting Motion to Set Intervention Bar Date; Exhibit A; Exhibit B; Letter-Opinion (1998 March 10); Order Grantin Motion to Allow Use of PACA Trustee's Tin Number Without PACA Escrow Account (1998 March 10)
  • Pirone v. Nw. Mut. Life Ins. Co. 1998 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • Pitino v. Great Atl. & Pac. Tea Co. 1998 October 02; Opinion; Order
  • Pollan v. Genisys Reservation Sys. 1998 June 04; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 July 06)
  • Product Possibilities v. Ferraro Foods 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • Rosatelli v. United Capital Corp. 1998 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • Russ Berrie & Co. v. N. Am. Bear Co. 1998 February 18; Opinion; Order
  • Rycoline Prod. v. C&W Unlimited 1998 March 31; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 August 26)
  • Ryder Truck Rental v. Metro Mailing Sys. 1998 May 29; Opinion; Order
  • Sabrin v. Moran 1998 February 03; Opinion; Order Granting Plaintiffs' Motion for Attorneys' Fees; Order (1998 February 06); Stipulation of Dismissal; Consent Order
  • Sarullo v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1998 April 02; Opinion; Order
  • Scarfi v. Secon Metals Corp. 1998 April 24; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 July 30); Amended Order for Judgment (1998 July 31)
  • Seeward v. Frieder 1998 November 06; Opinion; Order Granting Middletown Dump Inc. Reasonable Attorney Fees
  • Solucorp Indus. v. Tristate Restoration Co. 1998 October 09; Opinion; Order
  • Sorokko v. Nippon Life Ins. Co. of Am. 1998 June 02; Opinion; Order
  • Status Int'l v. M&D Mar. 1998 January 15; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 April 24)
  • Storm v. Twp. of Woodbridge 1998 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Young 1998 August 20; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 November 05); Opinion; Order (1998 November 23)
  • Tagliarine v. Comm'r 1998 July 22; Opinion; Order
  • Tarczynski v. Barbo 1998 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • In re Tavares 1998 March 13; Opinion; Order
  • Thompson v. Corestates Fin. Corp. 1998 January 12; Opinion; Order

Box 59:

  • Twp. of West Orange v. Whitman 1998 April 29; Opinion; Order; Published as: Twp. of West Orange v. Whitman, 8 F. Supp. 2d 408 (1998).
  • Trian Group v. Accident & Cas. Ins. Co. of Winterthur 1998 August 12; Opinion; Order
  • Tyger v. Magarino 1998 June 23; Opinion; Order
  • Tyndell v. E. Jersey State Prison 1998 January 12; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1998 July 22)
  • United States v. Home Builders Inst. 1998 May 12; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. One 1993 Porsche 968 Cabriolet Auto. 1998 July 08; Opinion; Order
  • U.S. Small Bus. Admin. v. Chang 1998 April 30; Opinion; Order
  • Valderrama v. United States 1998 March 30; Opinion; Order
  • Ward v. N.J. Natural Gas Co. 1998 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Westley v. Morton 1998 August 13; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Apfel 1998 October 29; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Morton 1998 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. Nickolopoulos 1998 May 04; Opinion; Order

Series 17: Papers, 1999
Boxes 59-63:
All papers dated 1999. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 59:

  • Aduna-Yap v. Nordstrom 1999 January 21; Opinion; Order
  • Aiello v. Union County 1999 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • Alston v. Williams 1999 November 18; Opinion; Order
  • Antonio B. v. Jersey City Bd. of Ed. 1999 September 23; Opinion; Order
  • Aziz v. Dep't of Corr. 1999 December 03; Opinion; Order
  • Bayside Cas. Ins. Co. v. United States 1999 June 11; Opinion; Order
  • Berdiel v. Apfel 1999 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Besas v. Reno 1999 March 19; Opinion; Order
  • In re Bey 1999 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Borough of Bogota v. CSX Corp. 1999 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Brewer v. Epstein & Sons 1999 December 14; Opinion; Order
  • Brisar Indus. v. C.B. Displays 1999 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Barbo 1999 June 03; Opinion; Order
  • Brown v. Int'l Bhd. of Elec. Workers 1999 May 11; Opinion; Order; Amended Opinion (1999 May 17)
  • Bunch v. All Pro Sports & Entm't 1999 April 19; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1999 July 15)

Box 60:

  • Callaway Golf Co. v. Fairway to Heaven 1999 July 30; Opinion; Order
  • Centennial Ins. Co. v. Lithotech Sales 1999 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Ctr. for Hope Hospice v. Sec'y of Health & Human Serv. 1999 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Chambers v. Pitts 1999 June 11; Opinion; Order
  • Clayton v. PetSmart Store Support Group 1999 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • Conte, Inc. v. Kawasaki Kisen Kaisha, Ltd. 1999 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Dadic v. Wuest 1999 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Daniels v. Thomas & Betts Corp. 1999 April 28; Opinion; Order
  • Doege v. Shalala 1999 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • DeNofa v. DeNofa 1999 March 23; Opinion; Order Ι Opinion; Order (1999 April 12)
  • Dy-Core of Pa. v. Rothe-Johnson Project Serv. Corp. 1999 April 06; Opinion; Order
  • EDGAR Online v. Parisi 1999 December 07; Opinion; Order
  • Enriquez v. Morton 1999 August 31; Opinion; Order
  • Equal Employment Opportunity Comm'n v. Shelcore 1999 June 30; Opinion; Order
  • Eubank v. Portside Apartments Urban Renewal Co. 1999 May 18; Opinion; Order
  • Farquharson v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv. 1999 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Home Loan Mortgage Corp. v. Moye 1999 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Ins. Co. v. Hock 1999 January 21; Opinion; Order
  • Fernandez v. United Parcel Serv. 1999 April 30; Opinion; Order
  • Fiore v. Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. 1999 July 20; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2000 July 12)
  • George v. Am. Bioproducts 1999 April 05; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (20000225 )
  • Georgen v. Desert Health Prod. 1999 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Grinblat v. Benel 1999 April 14; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2000 November 22)
  • Hardy v. United States 1999 January 29; Opinion; Order

Box 61:

  • Harrow v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1999 December 23; Opinion; Order; Published as: Harrow v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am., 76 F. Supp. 2d 558 (D. N.J. 1999).
  • Harte v. Int'l House of Pancakes 1999 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Hellriegel v. Zucker-Zarett 1999 February 24; Opinion; Order
  • Hernandez v. Comm'r 1999 September 23; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (1999 November 11)
  • Imperial Spirits v. Trans Marine Int'l Corp. 1999 February 17; Opinion; Order; Published as: Imperial Spirits v. Trans Marine Int'l Corp., No. 98-5469, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 9586 (D. N.J. Feb. 17, 1999).
  • Indemax v. Nordson Corp. 1999 June 15; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. N.J. Transit Rail 1999 August 20; Opinion; Order
  • J.P. v. E. Brunswick Twp. Bd. of Ed. 1999 April 07; Opinion; Order
  • Knowledge Commc'n Serv. v. AIU N. Am. 1999 August 20; Opinion; Order
  • Lagg v. Amtrak 1999 April 28; Opinion; Order
  • Larkin v. Beneficial N.J., Inc. 1999 February 11; Opinion; Order
  • Leon v. Comm'r 1999 July 23; Opinion; Order
  • Loria v. Lockwood Boat Works 1999 April 30; Opinion; Order
  • Mansol Assoc. v. Mansol Indus. 1999 April 22; Opinion; Order
  • Mardini v. Viking Freight 1999 December 02; Opinion; Order; Published as: Mardini v. Viking Freight, 92 F. Supp. 2d 378 (D. N.J. 1999).
  • Marlow v. DeFusco 1999 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Martelli v. N.J. State Dep't of Corr. 1999 November 18; Opinion; Order of Partial Dismissal
  • Matos v. Comm'r 1999 June 25; Opinion; Order
  • Medina v. Barbo 1999 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • Mery v. N.J. Dep't of Ed. 1999 May 04; Opinion; Order
  • Miller v. Morton 1999 December 10; Opinion; Order
  • Mitchell v. Apfel 1999 March 04; Opinion; Order

Box 62:

  • Morris v. Barbo 1999 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • Morzh Oy Ab v. Express Shipping Serv. 1999 September 27; Opinion; Order
  • Mullen v. Port Auth. 1999 December 17; Opinion; Order; Published as: Mullen v. Port Auth., 100 F. Supp. 2d 249 (D. N.J. 1999).
  • Murphy v. Port Auth. 1999 March 01; Opinion; Order
  • McDonnell v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1999 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • McKinnie v. Super. Ct. 1999 June 09; Opinion; Order
  • Nat'l Sea Prod. v. LaGalia 1999 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • Nelson v. Comm'r 1999 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Payphone Ass'n v. City of East Orange 1999 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • In re N.J. Secretarial Sch. 1999 November 18; Opinion; Order
  • Nwachukwu v. AFD Contract Furniture 1999 December 29; Opinion; Order
  • Okoro v. United States 1999 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • Payne v. Union County 1999 March 22; Opinion; Order
  • Perez v. Citicorp Individual Banking Group 1999 October 27; Opinion
  • Plummer v. United States 1999 December 29; Opinion; Order
  • Precise Exercise Equip. v. Cybex Int'l 1999 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • Radowitz v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y 1999 November 29; Opinion; Order
  • Riel v. Meadowlands Ctr. for the Arts 1999 March 02; Opinion; Order
  • Rivera v. Cont'l Airlines 1999 July 16; Opinion; Order
  • Rojas v. United States 1999 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • Rycoline Products v. C&W Unlimited 1999 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Semeraro v. AGL Welding Supply Co. 1999 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Sharma v. United States 1999 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Sheth v. Edison Twp. 1999 May 25; Opinion; Order

Box 63:

  • Shuart v. Guhl 1999 August 10; Opinion; Order
  • Siss v. County of Passaic 1999 May 19; Opinion; Order; Published as: Siss v. County of Passaic, 75 F. Supp. 2d 325 (D. N.J. 1999).
  • Smith v. Essex County Dep't of Health & Rehab. 1999 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. Essex County Jail 1999 January 19; Opinion; Order
  • Snyder v. Am. Ass'n of Blood Banks 1999 February 24; Opinion; Order
  • Sotelo v. United States 1999 April 28; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Young 1999 January 20; Opinion; Order
  • Swinton v. Foley 1999 October 15; Opinion; Order
  • Szalkowski v. Roy F. Weston, Inc. 1999 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Thompson v. Corestates Fin. Corp. 1999 January 08; Opinion; Order
  • In re Top Grade Sausage 1999 April 16; Opinion; Order; Published as: In re Top Grade Sausage, No. 99-393, 1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16529 (D. N.J. Apr. 16, 1999).
  • United Stationers Supply Co. v. Rod 1999 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Util. & Transp. Contractors Ass'n of N.J. v. Essex County Improvement Auth. 1999 May 20; Opinion; Order; Exhibit I
  • Valladolid v. Comm'r 1999 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Vandever v. Alpert 1999 October 26; Opinion; Order
  • Villanueva v. Comm'r 1999 December 30; Opinion; Order
  • Visual Tel. Int'l v. Pickens 1999 August 26; Opinion; Order
  • Williams v. McKeen 1999 March 03; Opinion; Order
  • Williams Envtl. Serv. v. Akzo Nobel Chem. 1999 June 09; Opinion; Order
  • Winstead v. State 1999 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Wright v. J.M. Huber Corp. 1999 July 28; Opinion; Order
  • Young v. City of New Brunswick 1999 April 23; Opinion; Order; Exhibit

Series 18: Papers, 2000
Boxes 64-67:
All papers dated 2000. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 64:  

  • Aburomi v. Englehardt 2000 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Alamo v. Cobb 2000 May 19; Opinion; Order
  • Ali v. Johnson 2000 July 10; Opinion; Order
  • Almonte v. United States 2000 May 24; Opinion; Order
  • Angelica Textile Serv. v. Cathedral Healthcare Sys. 2000 June 01; Opinion; Order
  • Assoc. Commercial Corp. v. Sarco Int'l 2000 May 26; Opinion; Order
  • Avendano v. Apfel 2000 August 04; Opinion; Order
  • Barnes v. Kerr 2000 November 22; Opinion; Order
  • Battle v. Blackwell 2000 August 28; Opinion; Order
  • Benjamin v. Inchcape Shipping Serv. 2000 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Bd. of Tr. v. Centra 2000 June 30; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Bostic v. N.J. Ins. Underwriting Ass'n 2000 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Buck v. Twp. of Neptune 2000 September 28; Opinion; Order
  • Buglino v. Comm'r 2000 May 01; Opinion; Order
  • Canfield Scientific v. Cambridge 2000 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Colangelo v. Port Auth. 2000 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • County of Morris v. Nationalist Movement 2000 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Crossroads Cogeneration Corp. v. Orange & Rockland Util. 2000 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Cruz v. Apfel 2000 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • D'Alessandro v. Hendricks 2000 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Daniels v. Thomas & Betts Corp. 2000 May 30; Opinion; Order
  • Day v. Bambo 2000 May 02; Opinion; Order of Partial Dismissal
  • D.B. Consolidated Enter. v. Walgreen Co. 2000 February 25; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2000 October 19)
  • Doege v. Shalala 2000 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • Doherty v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund 2000 November 14; Opinion; Order
  • Duran v. Mellon Mortgage Co. 2000 May 16; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2000 July 13)
  • Econo-Lite Prod. v. Lahijani 2000 January 10; Opinion; Order
  • Eden v. Krieger 2000 August 11; Opinion; Order

Box 65:

  • Fed. Bronze Casting Indus. v. Employers Ins. of Wasau 2000 November 02; Opinion; Order
  • Fraternal Order of Newark Police v. City of Newark 2000 August 11; Opinion; Order
  • Furey v. Bell Commc'n Research 2000 April 28; Opinion; Order
  • Gambino v. Morris 2000 April 10; Opinion; Published as: Gambino v. Morris, No. 95-4559, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18498 (D. N.J. Apr. 19, 2000).; No-95-4559, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18534 (D. N.J. Apr. 10, 2000).
  • Gomez v. Apfel 2000 March 27; Opinion; Order
  • Gonzalez v. United States 2000 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Gonzalez v. Comm'r 2000 June 30; Opinion; Order
  • Grabowski v. Vital Signs 2000 August 03; Opinion; Order
  • Guckenberger v. Group Reimbursement Welfare Fund, Local 464A 2000 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Haggenmiller v. Moore 2000 July 13; Opinion; Order
  • Hanjin Shipping Co. v. Samsung Electro-Mech. Am. 20002202; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. Kinahan 2000 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Holder v. Pinchak 2000 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Huberman v. Apfel 2000 April 18; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Motor Freight v. Yang Ming Line 2000 November 22; Opinion; Order Denying Partial Summary Judgment; Order Certifying Class
  • Irving v. Borough of Madison 2000 August 14; Opinion; Order
  • Irving v. Sullivan 2000 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • ITT Industries. v. Wastecorp 2000 March 16; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. Moore 2000 April 10; Opinion; Order of Partial Dismissal
  • Jacob v. Zavatsky 2000 June 30; Opinion; Order
  • Jenkins v. New Brunswick Bd. of Ed. 2000 February 25; Opinion; Order
  • Jennings v. Middlesex County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 2000 February 17; Opinion; Order
  • Johnson v. Hendricks 2000 September 22; Opinion
  • Ken Smith Motors v. Dilts 2000 October 06; Opinion; Exhibit A;
  • Latchford v. Weeks Marine 2000 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • Lawson v. Fidelity Brokerage Serv. 2000 May 02; Opinion; Order

Box 66:

  • Leon v. United States 2000 July 31; Opinion; Order
  • Lessler v. Vantage Travel Serv. 2000 February 18; Opinion; Order
  • Lidman v. Newark Redevelopment & Hous. Auth. 2000 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Mackerley v. Percudani 2000 July 20; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Marchitto v. Connelly 2000 March 20; Opinion; Order
  • Marotta v. Drappi 2000 July 11; Opinion; Order
  • Martinez v. State 2000 March 22; Opinion; Order
  • McCormack v. Sixty-One W. Sixty-Two Owners Corp. 2000 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • McKinnie v. Super. Ct. 2000 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Medical Resources v. Bleggi 2000 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Miele v. Digiorgio Corp. 2000 May 19; Opinion; Order
  • Mitsui Marine & Fire Ins. Co. v. Blue Anchor Line 2000 May 03; Opinion; Order
  • Morris v. Barbo 2000 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Payphone Ass'n v. Twp. of North Bergen 2000 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Neyor v. Green 2000 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Nikov v. Gregory Park Coop. Corp. 2000 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Norwood Venture Corp. v. Crescenzo 2000 October 05; Opinion; Order
  • Paduani v. McKeen 2000 January 12; Opinion; Order
  • Page v. Keebler Co. 2000 August 16; Opinion; Order
  • Perez v. Citicorp Individual Banking Group 2000 March 13; Opinion
  • Pettigrew v. Minor 2000 March 15; Opinion; Order
  • Pinker v. Roche Holdings 2000 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • Pho v. Hendricks 2000 August 09; Opinion; Order
  • Port Auth. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co. 2000 June 05; Opinion; Order │ Order Amending Opinion (2000 June 19); Published as: Port Auth. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co., No. 91-2907, 2000 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20724 (D. N.J. June 5, 2000).
  • Posnansky v. Osen 2000 September 19; Opinion; Order
  • Post v. Aetna Ins. Co. 2000 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Randazzo v. Graphic Commc'n Int'l 2000 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Riel v. Meadowlands Ctr. for the Arts 2000 March 30; Opinion; Order

Box 67:

  • Rivera v. Comm'r 2000 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Apfel 2000 March 27; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Reno 2000 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Rodriguez v. Terhune 2000 June 29; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2000 September 29)
  • Scacco v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 2000 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Schwartz v. Cache 2000 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Scott v. Hendricks 2000 June 19; Opinion; Civil Action Order
  • Seibert v. Nusbaum, Stein, Goldstein, Bronstein, & Compeau 2000 June 19; Opinion; Order
  • Semeraro v. AGL Welding Supply Co. 2000 August 29; Opinion; Order
  • Shabazz v. Morris County Corr. Facility 2000 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Shah v. Comm'r 2000 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Shamsid-Deen v. Twp. of Scotch Plains 2000 February 25; Opinion; Order
  • Smith v. Essex County Dep't of Health & Rehab. 2000 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Solchem Italiano v. Bio-Tech. Gen. Corp. 2000 March 21; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2000 July 13)
  • Spellman v. Pepperdine Univ. 2000 August 17; Opinion; Order
  • Storm v. Twp. of Woodbridge 2000 June 08; Opinion; Order; Letter
  • Tanzman v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co. 2000 December 28; Opinion; Order
  • Teamsters Union, Local 102 v. Anheuser-Busch 2000 July 06; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. DeIulio 2000 August 11; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Int'l Boxing Fed'n 2000 January 28; Opinion; Order; Order (2000 December 11)
  • Vairo v. Kalvin-Miller Int'l 2000 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Valencia-Gil v. United States 2000 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • Vegotsky v. Elio's Bakery & Deli II 2000 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • Viojo v. Comm'r 2000 June 03; Opinion; Order
  • Visual Tel. Int'l v. Pickens 2000 January 28; Opinion; Order
  • V-Twin Mfg. v. V-Twin Holdings 2000 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • Warner-Lambert Co. v. Breath Asure 2000 November 22; Opinion; Exhibit I; Exhibit II; Order
  • Williams v. Bashir 2000 April 03; Opinion; Order Granting Application to Proceed Without Prepayment of Fees and Dismissing Complaint
  • Woods v. County of Hudson 2000 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Worsley v. U.S. Marshal Serv. 2000 April 28; Letter
  • Zenith Goldline Pharm. v. Novartis Pharm. Corp. 2000 May 05; Opinion; Order
  • Zenith Lab. v. Aftec 2000 September 22; Opinion; Order
  • Zuniga v. Comm'r 2000 August 11; Opinion; Order

Series 19: Papers, 2001
Boxes 68-70:
All papers dated 2001. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 68:

  • Amadeo v. Comm'r 2001 September 28; Opinion; Order
  • Am. Cyanamid Co. v. Natural Sys. Int'l Corp. 2001 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Angelica Textile Serv. v. Cathedral Healthcare Sys. 2001 October 03; Opinion
  • Ardinger v. First Union Nat'l Bank 2001 March 29; Opinion; Order; Exhibit
  • Asmar v. Hous. Auth. of Bayonne 2001 December 13; Opinion; Order
  • Autronica Marine v. Navia Mar. AS 2001 March 13; Opinion; Order
  • Avisma Titano-Magnesium Kombinat v. Dart Mgmt. 2001 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Bartelstone Glass Distrib. v. TGI Glass 2001 March 23; Opinion; Order
  • Bloomfield Partners v. McGraw Edison Co. 2001 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Blue Pearl Music Corp. v. Bradford 2001 June 18; Opinion; Order
  • Boyd v. W. N.Y. Police Dep't 2001 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • BRM Techn. v. Broadview Int'l 2001 June 22; Opinion; Order
  • Bullaro v. N.J. Highway Auth. 2001 December 27; Opinion; Order
  • Burgess v. Hudson County Corr. Ctr. 2001 April 23; Opinion; Order
  • Byrne v. Roman Catholic Church 2001 May 02; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Cablevision of Newark v. Sklar 2001 May 21; Opinion; Order
  • Calloway v. Oxford Health Plans 2001 March 22; Opinion; Order; Published as: Calloway v. Oxford Health Plans, No. 97-3946, 2001 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6839 (D. N.J. Mar. 22, 2001).
  • Centennial Ins. Co. v. Lithotech Sales 2001 February 13; Opinion; Order; Published as: Centennial Ins. Co. v. Lithotech Sales, 187 F. Supp. 2d 214 (D. N.J. 2001).
  • Cent. Foods Group v. DFG Foods 2001 February 23; Opinion; Order
  • Co-Steel Raritan v. Timberline Transp. 2001 December 27; Opinion; Order
  • Daniels v. Pinchak 2001 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Davis v. Comm'r 2001 August 01; Opinion; Order
  • DeVito v. Bd. of Ed. of Newark 2001 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Engineered Devices Corp. v. Barsplice Prod. 2001 January 05; Opinion; Order
  • Encore Enter. v. Comm'r of Mass. Dep't of Labor & Work Force Dev. 2001 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • F.P. v. N.J. Dep't of Ed. 2001 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Bronze Casting Indus. v. Employers Ins. of Wausau 2001 May 18; Opinion; Order
  • Ford v. Sussex County Jail 2001 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • Garatina v. DRL Assoc. 2001 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • Giancaspro v. Alitalia 2001 October 26; Opinion; Order
  • Grabowski v. Vital Signs 2001 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Graham v. Lissak 2001 April 30; Opinion; Order
  • In re Grand Court Lifestyles 2001 December 19; Opinion; Order
  • Gwiazda v. Comm'r 2001 March 30; Opinion; Order
  • Haddy v. United States 2001 February 22; Opinion; Order
  • Hall v. Dosky 2001 October 04; Opinion; Order
  • Han v. United States 2001 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Harper v. Twp. of Roxbury 2001 July 16; Opinion; Order
  • Harris v. N. State Prison 2001 February 07; Opinion; Order
  • Hemmings v. Meehan 2001 January 09; Opinion; Order

Box 69:

  • High Liner Foods v. LaGalia 2001 July 30; Opinion; Order
  • Holley v. Gober 2001 September 18; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 November 14)
  • Int'l Bhd. of Teamsters, Local 863 v. Allied Beverage Group 2001 February 06; Opinion; Order
  • ITT Indus. v. Wastecorp 2001 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Journey v. Crown Equip. Corp. 2001 October 29; Opinion; Order
  • Kaplan v. Hu 2001 November 14; Opinion; Order
  • Keegan v. St. James Med. Ctr. 2001 June 20; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 November 27)
  • Keene v. Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft 2001 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Khalil v. Otto Bock Orthopadische Industrie Gmbh & Co. 2001 January 09; Opinion; Order
  • Khaliq v. Pinchak 2001 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Kirk v. City of Orange Twp. 2001 June 18; Opinion; Order
  • Langley v. Henderson 2001 April 27; Opinion; Order
  • Latchford v. Weeks Marine 2001 March 19; Opinion; Order
  • Mackerley v. Percudani 2001 March 22; Opinion; Order
  • Mann v. Barbo 2001 April 11; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 July 24); Opinion; Order (2001 July 26)
  • In re Morrison 2001 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • In re Mullarkey 2001 December 27; Opinion; Order
  • Mullen v. Comm'r 2001 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • Musculoskeletal Transplant Found. v. Osteotech 2001 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • In re Mut. Benefit Overseas 2001 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • Nadler v. Applebaum 2001 March 29; Opinion; Order
  • Nadler v. Livingston Bd. of Ed. 2001 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • Naranjo v. Olson 2001 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Nichol v. Mount Hope Rock Prod. 2001 April 09; Opinion; Order
  • N.L. v. Montville Twp. Sch. Dist. Bd. of Ed. 2001 December 07; Opinion; Order
  • Pazden v. Terhune 2001 February 08; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 September 06)
  • Pepitone v. Merrill Lynch & Co. 2001 January 16; Opinion; Order
  • Pereira v. Farmer 2001 July 10; Opinion; Order
  • Perez v. Hendricks 2001 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • Petway v. Syms Dep't Store 2001 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • Pinker v. Roche Holdings 2001 February 16; Opinion; Order
  • Port Auth. v. Affiliated FM Ins. Co. 2001 March 29; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 May 01); Order (2001 May 17)
  • Rejevich v. Comm'r 2001 May 30; Opinion; Order

Box 70:

  • Reliance Nat'l Indem. Co. v. Celadon Trucking Serv. 2001 March 19; Opinion; Order
  • Remoi v. State 2001 June 29; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 August 24)
  • Rivera v. Cont'l Airlines 2001 June 13; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 August 24)
  • Rosario v. Hadley 2001 February 16; Opinion; Order
  • Sands v. Environ Prod. 2001 February 08; Opinion; Order
  • Santomenna v. Lors 2001 July 19; Opinion; Order
  • Santos Mfg. v. Select Jewelry, Inc. 2001 July 20; Opinion; Order
  • Scacco v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 2001 July 17; Opinion; Order
  • Schwartz v. Cache 2001 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Shabazz v. Armani 2001 December 27; Opinion; Order
  • Solchem Italiana v. Bio-Tech. Gen. Corp. 2001 April 03; Opinion; Order
  • St. Preux v. Coach USA 2001 November 30; Opinion; Order
  • Sykes v. Hendricks 2001 December 19; Opinion; Order
  • Tanzman v. Paul Revere Life Ins. Co. 2001 May 02; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2001 July 19)
  • Teleglobe v. Kelly Broad. Sys. 2001 December 12; Opinion; Order
  • Turner v. Palm Bay Imp. 2001 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Telephonics Corp. 2001 August 27; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Baig 2001 September 06; Opinion; Order
  • Vairo v. Kalvin-Miller Int'l 2001 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Valladolid v. Comm'r 2001 April 23; Opinion; Order
  • Vanstuyvesant v. Lloyd 2001 March 09; Opinion; Order
  • Vines v. Burton 2001 November 28; Opinion; Order
  • Walker v. ITT Hartford Life Ins. Co. 2001 May 31; Opinion; Order
  • Weiss v. Stabinski 2001 December 27; Opinion; Order
  • Williams Envtl. Serv. v. Akzo Nobel Chem. 2001 July 17; Opinion; Order
  • Woods v. County of Hudson 2001 August 02; Opinion; Order

Series 20: Papers, 2002
Boxes 71-73:
All papers dated 2002. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 71:

  • Ahern v. Comm'r 2002 September 18; Opinion; Order
  • Ali v. Terhune 2002 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Asahi Kogaku Kogyo KK v. Samsung Opto-Elec. Am. 2002 August 30; Opinion; Order
  • Auerbach v. Auerbach 2002 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • In re Banicki 2002 March 08; Opinion; Order
  • Bishop v. State 2002 September 26; Opinion; Order
  • Bronze Shields v. City of Newark 2002 April 17; Opinion; Order; Published as: Bronze Shields v. City of Newark, 214 F. Supp. 2d 443 (D. N.J. 2002).
  • Brydbord v. Kash 'N Gold 2002 May 08; Opinion; Order
  • Buck v. Twp. of Neptune 2002 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • Bullock v. Fed. Express Corp. 2002 June 06; Opinion; Order
  • Burton v. Corr. Med. Serv. 2002 February 25; Opinion; Order
  • Canfield Scientific v. Cambridge 2002 May 07; Opinion; Order
  • Cardile Bros. Mushroom Packaging v. H. Nutile & Co. 2002 August 08; Opinion; Order
  • Cent. Foods Group v. DFG Foods 2002 December 05; Opinion; Order
  • Clavin v. Henderson 2002 March 22; Opinion; Order
  • Colarusso v. Transcapital Fiscal Sys. 2002 August 27; Opinion; Order; Published as: Colarusso v. Transcapital Fiscal Sys., 227 F. Supp. 2d 243 (D. N.J. 2002).
  • County of Morris v. Nationalist Movement 2002 June 21; Opinion; Order; Exhibit
  • Cradle v. State 2002 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • DeFina v. State Farm Mut. Co. 2002 July 26; Opinion; Order
  • DeSaussure Equip. Co. v. Falcon Prod. 2002 November 01; Opinion; Order
  • Dunlap v. Leone 2002 December 02; Opinion; Order
  • 821 McBride Ave., Inc. v. Borough of West Paterson 2002 June 28; Opinion; Appendix; Order of Judgment
  • Emeline Publ'n v. Perfect Ten 2002 December 06; Opinion; Order
  • Essex Computers v. J&J Computing 2002 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Faniel v. Englehard Corp. 2002 July 09; Opinion; Order
  • Feigenbaum v. Summit Health Adm'r 2002 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Garatina v. DRL Assoc. 2002 November 13; Opinion; Order; Exhibit
  • In re The Grand Union Co. 2002 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Grinblat v. Benel 2002 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Hartz v. Bloomingdales 2002 March 14; Opinion; Order
  • Hashemi v. Twp. of Mount Olive 2002 September 26; Opinion; Order
  • Howard v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 2002 August 30; Opinion
  • Howard v. Nunn 2002 August 09; Opinion; Order

Box 72:

  • ITT Indus. v. Wastecorp 2002 June 28; Opinion; Order (draft, unsigned) │ Opinion; Order | Opinion (2002 October 16); Appendix 1: Calculation Values; Order │ Opinion (2002 December 30); Appendix; Order │Permanent Injunction (2002 December 30)
  • Jackson v. Moore 2002 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Johnson v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. 2002 January 28; Opinion; Order
  • Jones v. Linder 2002 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Kennedy v. Froehlich 2002 July 15; Opinion; Order
  • King v. Hendricks 2002 September 20; Opinion; Order
  • Komet v. Republic of Fin. 2002 February 01; Opinion; Order; Published as: Komet v. Republic of Fin., No. 99-6080, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2922 (D. N.J. Feb. 1, 2002).
  • Laurier v. Hendricks 2002 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Lawson v. Fid. Brokerage Serv. 2002 June 10; Opinion; Order
  • Lema v. Comm'r 2002 December 23; Opinion; Order
  • Lim v. Ashcroft 2002 August 06; Opinion; Order; Published as: Lim v. Ashcroft, No. 01-3271, 2002 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21529 (D. N.J. Aug. 6, 2002).
  • Longueira v. United States 2002 December 18; Opinion; Order
  • Mann v. Barbo 2002 June 26; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2002 December 12)
  • Markenstein v. Comm'r 2002 June 27; Opinion; Order
  • Matesic v. Comm'r 2002 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • Med. Soc'y of N.J. v. Herr 2002 March 21; Opinion; Order; Published as: Med. Soc'y of N.J. v. Herr, 191 F. Supp. 2d 574 (D. N.J. 2002).
  • Medlar v. Sci. Applications Int'l Corp. 2002 June 21; Opinion; Order; Melendez v. Dynair Group 2002 June 06; Opinion; Order
  • Meyer v. Kent 2002 April 29; Opinion; Order │Opinion; Order (2002 November 25)
  • Moeller v. Kone, Inc. 2002 April 04; Opinion; Order
  • Mullarkey v. Tamboer 2002 December 27; Opinion & Order
  • Nivargikar v. Comm'r 2002 August 19; Opinion; Order
  • Nkrumah v. Comm'r 2002 June 26; Opinion; Order
  • Noe v. Hochberg 2002 December 04; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order
  • N. Jersey Media Group v. Ashcroft 2002 May 28; Opinion; Order; Preliminary Injunction; Published as: N. Jersey Media Group v. Ashcroft, 205 F. Supp. 2d 288 (D. N.J. 2002).
  • Palmer v. U.S. Att'y Gen. 2002 February 05; Opinion; Order
  • Pascal v. Ashcroft 2002 May 08; Opinion & Order
  • Pereira v. City of Newark 2002 January 07; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2002 May 22)

Box 73:

  • Pomales v. Moore 2002 April 25; Opinion; Order
  • Preferred Nat'l Ins. Co. v. F. Rodriguez Constr. Corp. 2002 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • Propoco v. Jovino 2002 June 12; Opinion; Order
  • Ranbaxy-Schein Pharma v. P&L Dev. of N.Y. Corp. 2002 May 08; Opinion; Order
  • Riddles v. Ferguson 2002 August 21; Opinion; Order
  • Rothwell v. United States 2002 January 07; Opinion; Order
  • RLI Ins. Co. v. Brender 2002 August 30; Opinion; Order
  • Ryan v. Slater 2002 December 09; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2002 December 09)
  • Samson v. Capital Asset Research Corp. 2002 September 12; Opinion; Order
  • Sands v. Environ Prod. 2002 February 19; Opinion; Order
  • Sanyei Corp. v. At Home Int'l 2002 August 22; Opinion; Order
  • Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm. 2002 August 08; Opinion; Order; Published as: Schering Corp. v. Geneva Pharm., 275 F. Supp. 2d 534 (D. N.J. 2002).
  • Seibert v. Nusbaum, Stein, Goldstein, Bronstein & Compeau 2002 August 06; Opinion; Order
  • Silver Leaf v. Tasty Fries 2002 December 04; Opinion; Order
  • Timoll v. Barnhart 2002 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • Tobin v. Molesphini 2002 December 18; Opinion; Order; Amended Complaint
  • Togbah v. Ashcroft 2002 December 20; Opinion; Order
  • Total Car Franchising Corp. v. Wilhovsky 2002 March 27; Opinion
  • Tucker v. Roberts 2002 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • Tucker v. Walsh 2002 November 13; Opinion; Order
  • Tuman v. Brown Chem. Co. 2002 November 04; Opinion; Order
  • Turner v. Palm Bay Imp. 2002 November 14; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Allen-Collins 2002 December 31; Opinion; Order
  • Willard v. Twp. of Jefferson 2002 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Woods v. County of Hudson 2002 June 26; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2002 November 01)

Series 21: Papers, 2003
Boxes 74-76:
All papers dated 2003. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 74:

  • Ali v. Terhune 2003 June 17; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2003 June 26); Opinion; Order (2003 December 11)
  • Allure Home Creation Co. v. Zak Designs 2003 July 03; Opinion; Order
  • AMB Inst. Realty Advisors v. Enviro-Sci., Inc. 2003 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • Bailey v. State 2003 April 17; Opinion; Order
  • Baldwin v. United States 2003 December 29; Opinion; Order
  • Bohuk v. Barnhard 2003 December 11; Opinion; Order
  • Bozeman v. Air Tran Airways 2003 October 29; Opinion; Order
  • BRM Tech. v. Broadview Int'l 2003 April 01; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2003 April 10); Opinion; Order (2003 May 07)
  • Bronze Shields v. City of Newark 2003 January 14; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2003 May 20)
  • Bryant v. D'Amico 2003 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • Bullaro v. N.J. Highway Auth. 2003 December 03; Opinion
  • Carter v. Barnhart 2003 June 11; Opinion; Order
  • Chester Basin Seafoods v. Frometta Consignment Corp. 2003 May 01; Opinion; Order
  • Chung v. Christie 2003 June 05; Opinion; Order
  • Cintron v. Speziale 2003 November 15; Opinion; Order
  • Coe v. Potter 2003 August 28; Opinion; Order
  • Daniels v. Thomas & Betts Corp. 2003 March 27; Opinion; Order; Appendix A; Appendix B; Appendix C
  • Danvers Motor Co. v. Ford Motor Co. 2003 July 01; Opinion; Order
  • Domingues v. Amerijet Int'l 2003 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Dragutinovic v. Ashcroft 2003 December 29; Opinion; Order
  • Eastman Kodak v. Hartford Life Ins. 2003 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Evans v. Port Auth. Trans-Hudson Corp. 2003 July 01; Opinion; Order
  • Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Check Investors, Inc. 2003 July 29 Opinion [incomplete] | Opinion (2003 July 30)
  • Fortner v. Unifoil Corp. 2003 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Giglio v. Cohen 2003 July 02; Opinion; Order
  • In re Goldstern 2003 January 29; Opinion; Order

Box 75:

  • Good News Enter. Inc. v. Edwards Eng'g Corp. 2003 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Stallion Indus. Inc. 2003 January 28; Opinion; Order | Opinion (2003 March 19); Order
  • Hosp. Professionals and Allied Employees of N.J., Local 5004 v. Englewood Hosp. and Med. Ctr. 2003 December 22; Opinion; Order
  • Int'l Bhd of Teamsters Local 945 Welfare Fund v. Vic & Sons Transp. 2003 June 05; Opinion; Order; Judgment
  • James v. Ashcroft 2003 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Jay Cashman v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng'r 2003 March 21; Opinion; Order
  • Jenkin v. Chartwells, USA 2003 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Kelley v. Comm'r 2003 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • Ketzner v. John Hancock Mut. Life Ins. Co. 2003 March 05; Opinion; Order; Amended Complaint Opinion (2003 March 05); Opinion; Order (2003 November 25); Opinion; Order (2003 December 11)
  • Laborers Int'l Union of N. Am. v. Metropolis Towers Apartment Corp. 2003 October 20; Opinion; Order
  • In re Mensah 2003 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Miguel v. Comm'r 2003 February 24; Opinion; Order
  • Miles v. Plunkett 2003 December 08; Opinion; Order
  • Millett v. Int'l Boxing Fed'n 2003 July 01; Opinion; Order
  • Morrison v. Greenaway 2003 February 27; Opinion; Order
  • Mosley v. Maersk, Inc. 2003 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • N.J. Sch. Bd. Ass'n Ins. Group v. Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. 2003 October 07; Opinion; Order
  • Oldhamv. Weeks Marine, Inc. 2003 February 14; Opinion; Order; Exhibit I; Exhibit II
  • Pascal v. Ashcroft 2003 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Pazden v. Maurer 2003 September 25; Opinion; Order; Order (2003 October 03)
  • Perez v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation 2003 April 03; Opinion; Order
  • Petchem v. Capacity Coverage Co. 2003 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Pinker v. Roche Holdings 2003 February 05; Opinion; Order
  • Pomales v. Moore 2003 March 28; Opinion; Order

Box 76:

  • Quaid v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv. 2003 April 24; Opinion; Order
  • Raftree v. First Investors Corp. 2003 March 14; Opinion; Order
  • Rhett v. Union County Div. of Soc. Serv. 2003 December 29; Opinion; Order; Amended Order
  • Ries v. Comm'r 2003 June 30; Opinion; Order
  • Ryan v. Mineta 2003 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Schering Corp. v. Perrigo Co. 2003 October 31; Opinion; Order
  • Sims v. Fed. Express Corp. 2003 January 17; Opinion; Order
  • Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Teva Pharm. 2003 March 05; Opinion; Order; Order (2003 March 11)
  • Soto v. Ace Mills, Inc. 2003 November 25; Opinion; Order
  • Tardy v. Comm'r 2003 June 04; Opinion; Order
  • Tasty Fries v. Romanoff 2003 June 13; Opinion; Order
  • Total Car Franchising Corp. v. Wilhovsky 2003 July 24; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Dougle 2003 January 13; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2003 October 20)
  • Vulcan Pioneers of N.J. v. City of Newark 2003 May 27; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Wells Fargo Funding v. Premier Mortgage Corp. 2003 June 17; Opinion; Order; Exhibit A
  • Wilkins v. Dep't of Veterans Affairs 2003 June 24; Opinion; Order
  • Worsley v. U.S. Marshals Serv. 2003 September 10; Letter-Opinion; Exhibit A
  • Yost v. Rutgers Univ. 2003 September 29; Opinion; Order

Series 22: Papers, 2004
Boxes 77-78:
All papers dated 2004. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 77:

  • Abdur-Rahman v. Anheuser-Busch 2004 September 27; Opinion; Order
  • All American Ford v. Market Scan Information Sys. 2004 January 22; Opinion; Order; Order
  • Asahi Kogaku Kogyo KK v. Samsung Opto-Elec. Am. 2004 December 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion (2004 August 05)
  • Bishop v. State 2004 January 19; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 August 16)
  • Brahmbhatt v. Ridge 2004 July 07; Opinion; Order
  • Branch v. Ventura 2004 October 12; Opinion; Order
  • Burlington Outlet Mall Joint Venture Prop. v. M.C. Mgmt. 2004 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Coe v. Potter 2004 July 07; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 July 15)
  • Corwin v. Ernst & Young 2004 August 11; Opinion; Order [undated]
  • Danvers Motor Co. v. Ford Motor Co. 2004 January 27; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 September 30)
  • In re DeNofa 2004 January 27; Opinion; Order
  • Directv v. Cimiluca 2004 January 26; Opinion; Order; Published as: Directv v. Cimiluca, No. 03-2422, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 27997 (D. N.J. Jan. 26, 2004).
  • Doherty v. Teamsters Pension Trust Fund 2004 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Dzielo v. Barnhart 2004 March 25; Opinion; Order
  • Emeline Publ'n v. Perfect 10, Inc. 2004 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Evans v. Port Auth. Trans-Hudson Corp. 2004 September 24; Opinion; Order
  • Falcone v. Hendricks 2004 January 19; Opinion; Order
  • Fisher v. Sherrer 2004 February 09; Opinion; Order
  • Greenwich Ins. Co. v. 143 W. Assoc. 2004 December 01; Opinion; Order
  • Greg Manning Auctions v. Fulmer 2004 June 16; Opinion; Order
  • Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Stallion Indus. 2004 February 13; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 February 17)
  • Hayes v. Abode 2004 March 12; Opinion; Order
  • Heslop v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv. 2004 March 01; Opinion; Order
  • Immigration & Naturalization Serv. Detainees v. Middlesex County 2004 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Jackmon v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 2004 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Jackson v. Brown 2004 January 30; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 March 11)
  • Johnson v. Hendricks 2004 May 05; Opinion; Order
  • Kelley v. Comm'r 2004 June 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Kelley v. Comm'r, No. 02-3572, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28407 (D. N.J. June 30, 2004).
  • La Salle Nat'l Bank v. First Conn. Holding Group 2004 June 29; Opinion; Order
  • Meyer v. Kent 2004 March 26; Opinion; Order; Published as: Meyer v. Kent, No. 01-5836, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28834 (D. N.J. Mar. 26, 2004).
  • Mierzwa v. City of Garfield 2004 July 28; Opinion; Opinion; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 December 20); Opinion; Order (2004 December 23)
  • Moya v. State Farm Ins. Co. 2004 June 28; Opinion; Order

Box 78:

  • Muniz v. Hendricks 2004 March 29; Opinion; Order
  • Perez v. Comm'r 2004 September 30; Opinion; Order
  • Peterson v. Newark Police Dep't 2004 June 21; Opinion; Order
  • Rage Games Ltd. v. Majesco Sales, Inc. 2004 July 15; Opinion; Order
  • Rajaram v. Barnhart 2004 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Redding v. Corning 2004 July 07; Opinion; Order
    Published as: Redding v. Corning, No. 04-1971, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 29145 (D. N.J. July 7, 2004).
  • Reveron v. Tycom, Inc. 2004 September 30; Opinion; Order
    Published as: Reveron v. Tycom, Inc., No. 02-3599, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26667 (D. N.J. Sept. 30, 2004).
  • Rhett v. Union County Div. of Soc. Serv. 2004 February 18; Opinion; Order
  • Robert Wood Johnson Univ. Hosp. v. Thompson 2004 April 15; Opinion; Order
    Published as: Robert Wood Johnson Univ. Hosp. v. Thompson, No. 04-142, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6893 (D. N.J. Jan. 14, 2004).; No. 04-142, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8498 (D. N.J. Apr. 15, 2004).
  • Rodriguez v. Comm'r 2004 March 26; Opinion; Order
  • Roulhac v. Newark Beth Israel Med. Ctr. 2004 July 15; Opinion; Order
  • In re Royal Dutch/Shell Transp. Sec. Litig. 2004 June 30; Opinion; Order; Order; Opinion; Order (2004 August 03)
  • Ryan v. Slater 2004 January 30; Opinion; Order
  • Sanders v. Trinitas Hosp. 2004 October 25; Opinion; Order
    Published as: Sanders v. Trinitas Hosp., No. 02-1655, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 28506 (D. N.J. Oct. 25, 2004).
  • Scott v. Barnhart 2004 July 12; Opinion; Order
  • Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Teva Pharm. 2004 July 15; Opinion; Order; Order (2003 March 11)
    Published as: Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Teva Pharm., No. 02-3779, 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 26603 (D. N.J. July 15, 2004).
  • Synergy, Inc. v. Exact Software Co. 2004 August 02; Opinion; Order
  • Terminello v. City of Passaic 2004 January 22; Opinion; Order
  • Thomas v. Corr. Med. Serv. 2004 December 15; Opinion; Order
  • Truong v. Am. Ass'n of Univ. Professors 2004 December 09; Opinion; Order
  • Unionamerica Ins. Co. v. D&J Towing and Recovery 2004 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. $8,221,877.16 in U.S. Currency 2004 March 26; Opinion; Exhibit A; Order │ Opinion; Order (2004 July 06)
  • United States v. Cimera 2004 October 07; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Marshman 2004 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Veira v. Ashcroft 2004 January 07; Opinion; Order
  • Velez v. Lucent Techn. 2004 December 16; Opinion; Order
  • Vulcan Pioneers of N.J. v. City of Newark 2004 August 20; Opinion; Order
  • Woods v. County of Hudson 2004 November 23; Opinion
  • Yost v. Rutgers Univ. 2004 June 30; Opinion; Order

Series 23: Papers, 2005
Boxes 79-80:
All papers dated 2005. The papers are arranged alphabetically by case title within each calendar year. Note that some cases carry over across two or more years; they will be listed under the same case title in each year for which we have relevant documents.

Box 79:

  • Abreu v. United States 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: Abreu v. United States, No. 03-2961, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18085 (D. N.J. Aug. 15, 2005).
  • Adegbuji v. Fifteen Immigration & Customs Enforcement Agents 2005 January 06; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 15)
  • Alcantara v. United States 2005 August 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Alcantara v. United States, No. 03-3385, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36526 (D. N.J. Aug. 30, 2005).
  • Allure Home Creation v. Zak Designs 2005 August 10; Opinion; Exhibit PM 2 (2); Exhibit PM 3; Order; Order (2005 August 15); Published as: Allure Home Creation v. Zak Designs, No. 03-193, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17059 (D. N.J. Aug. 10, 2005).
  • Almahdi v. Rodriguez 2005 April 26; Opinion; Order
  • Anderson v. Operating Eng'r, Local 68 2005 May 25; Opinion; Order
  • Beasley v. Fletcher 2005 January 06; Opinion; Order
  • Bernardi v. United States 2005 June 09; Opinion & Order
  • Brown v. Catholic Cmty. Serv. 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: Brown v. Catholic Cmty. Serv., No. 05-837, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18159 (D. N.J. Aug. 15, 2005).
  • Buck v. Reick 2005 July 13; Opinion; Order
  • Bus. Edge Group v. Champion Mortgage Co. 2005 August 29; Opinion; Order; Published as: Bus. Edge Group v. Champion Mortgage Co., No. 03-5498, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36585 (D. N.J. Aug. 29, 2005).
  • Camillo v. Hendricks 2005 August 17; Opinion; Order; Published as: Camillo v. Hendricks, No. 03-1297, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18146 (D. N.J. Aug. 17, 2005).
  • Campbell v. Chase Manhattan Bank 2005 June 24; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 09); Published as: Campbell v. Chase Manhattan Bank, No. 02-3489, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16402 (D. N.J. June 24, 2005).; No. 02-3489, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43026 (D. N.J. Aug. 9, 2005).
  • Central Lewmar v. Gentilin 2005 June 01; Opinion; Order; Published as: Central Lewmar v. Gentilin, No. 03-4671, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 45902 (D. N.J. June 1, 2005).
  • Chao v. N.J. Licensed Beverage Ass'n 2005 May 17; Opinion; Order
  • Cradle v. Brooks 2005 July 11; Opinion; Order; Published as: Cradle v. Brooks, No. 02-2121, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 33417 (D. N.J. July 11, 2005).
  • Directv v. Cimiluca 2005 January 07; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Exhibit A; Exhibit B; Order (2005 March 08); Published as: Directv v. Cimiluca, No. 03-2422, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 10677 (D. N.J. Mar. 8, 2005).
  • Doumit v. Publishers Circulation Fulfillment 2005 March 30; Opinion; Order
  • Dunkin' Donuts v. Arkay Donuts 2005 April 13; Opinion; Order; Published as: Dunkin' Donuts v. Arkay Donuts, No. 05-387, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 43540 (D. N.J. Apr. 13, 2005).
  • Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Check Investors, Inc. 2005 July 15; Opinion; Final Order for Judgment and Permanent Injunction as to Defendants; Published as: Fed. Trade Comm'n v. Check Investors, Inc., No. 03-2115, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 34349 (D. N.J. July 15, 2005).; No. 03-2115, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 37199 (D. N.J. July 18, 2005).
  • Giraldo v. United States 2005 August 11; Opinion; Order; Published as: Giraldo v. United States, No. 04-709, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16862 (D. N.J. Aug. 11, 2005).
  • Gonzalez v. Passaic County Prob. 2005 August 24; Opinion; Order; Published as: Gonzalez v. Passaic County Prob., No. 04-3001, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18890 (D. N.J. Aug. 24, 2005).
  • Gonzalez v. United States 2005 August 30; Opinion; Transcript of Proceedings (Sentence); Exhibit B; Exhibit C; Order; Published as: Gonzalez v. United States, No. 99-1183, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 38496 (D. N.J. Aug. 30, 2005).
  • Gotowicz v. Ashcroft 2005 February 16; Opinion
  • Greg Manning Auctions v. Fulmer 2005 August 23; Opinion; Order
  • Hernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Serv. 2005 February 17; Opinion; Order
  • Hug v. Nia Group 2005 March 07; Opinion; Order
  • Jackus v. Elizabeth Bd. of Ed. 2005 March 04; Opinion; Order
  • Janssen Pharm. v. Mylan Pharm. 2005 February 07; Opinion; Order
  • Johnson v. Polo Ralph Lauren Corp. 2005 August 03; Opinion; Order
  • Landeta v. Comm'r 2005 May 16; Opinion; Order
  • Lomack v. City of Newark 2005 August 24; Opinion; Plaintiff's Exhibit 4; Plaintiff's Exhibit 5; Plaintiff's Exhibit 6; Order; Published as: Lomack v. City of Newark, No. 04-6085, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18892 (D. N.J. Aug. 24, 2005).

Box 80:

  • Lukovitch v. Wal-Mart Stores 2005 December 17; Opinion; Order
  • Luzardo v. United States 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: Luzardo v. United States, No. 03-2962, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18148 (D. N.J. Aug. 15, 2005).
  • Mierzwa v. City of Garfield 2005 April 18; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 24); Published as: Mierzwa v. City of Garfield, No. 04-5268, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18880 (D. N.J. Aug. 24, 2005).
  • Milton v. Comm'r 2005 June 28; Opinion; Order
  • Nash Distrib. v. Guinness Bass Imp. Co. 2005 June 03; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 25)
  • Nieves v. Comm'r 2005 August 30; Opinion; Order
  • O'Callaghan v. Harvey 2005 March 10; Opinion; Order
  • Papazacharis v. Cont'l Airlines 2005 July 28; Opinion; Order
  • Peterson v. Newark Police Dep't 2005 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Pentax Corp. v. Samsung Opto-Elec. Am. 2005 March 30; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 April 18)
  • Perez v. United States 2005 August 30; Opinion; Order; Published as: Perez v. United States, No. 03-4610, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 36382 (D. N.J. Aug. 30, 2005).
  • Prince v. Howmet Corp. 2005 April 28; Opinion; Order; Published as: Prince v. Howmet Corp., No. 03-5434, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16035 (D. N.J. Apr. 28, 2005).
  • Redding v. Owens Corning Co. 2005 August 03; Opinion; Order; Published as: Redding v. Owens Corning Co., No. 04-1971, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 16406 (D. N.J. Aug. 3, 2005).
  • Rivera v. Arvonio 2005 March 01; Opinion; Order
  • Robinson v. Comm'r 2005 August 30; Opinion; Order
  • In re Royal Dutch/Shell Transp. Sec. Litig. 2005 February 15;Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 09) │ Order (2005 August 15) │ Order (2005 August 23); Published as: In re Royal Dutch/Shell Transp. Sec. Litig., 380 F. Supp. 2d 509 (D. N.J. 2005).
  • Sanders v. Trinitas Hosp. 2005 August 24; Opinion; Order; Published as: Sanders v. Trinitas Hosp., No. 02-1655, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18985 (D. N.J. Aug. 24, 2005).
  • Silver v. Am. Inst. of Certified Pub. Accountants 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: Silver v. Am. Inst. of Certified Pub. Accountants, No. 01-4910, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18108 (D. N.J. Aug. 15, 2005).
  • Sisters of St. Dominic v. Allied Irish Bank 2005 March 10; Opinion; Order │ Opinion; Order (2005 August 10); Published as: Sisters of St. Dominic v. Allied Irish Bank, No. 03-3078, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 17032 (D. N.J. Aug. 10, 2005).
  • Smith v. United States 2005 August 24; Opinion; Order
  • Smithkline Beecham Corp. v. Teva Pharm. 2005 January 13; Opinion; Order
  • Solis v. Ashcroft 2005 February 28; Opinion; Release Order
  • Solis v. United States 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order
  • Tait v. City of Totowa Police Dep't 2005 March 10; Opinion; Order
  • Terminello v. City of Passaic 2005 April 21; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. $8,221,877.16 in U.S. Currency 2005 February 10; Opinion; Order
  • United States v. Pires de Almeida 2005 March 07; Opinion; Order
  • Wash v. United States 2005 August 15; Opinion; Order; Published as: Wash v. United States, No. 05-108, 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 18152 (D. N.J. Aug. 15, 2005).
  • Yarosh v. Salkind 2005 June 20; Opinion; Order
  • Yost v. Rutgers Univ. 2005 March 08; Opinion; Order

Case Summaries

  • Am. Home Prod. Corp. v. API Sys. 1983 April 08
    Dismisses plaintiff's application for a preliminary injunction enjoining defendant DMS Laboratories from selling products recognizable as API test strips because the plaintiff has not offered to show adequate evidence that it will suffer irreparable injury as a result of these sales. Grants defendants' motion for an order barring arbitration in Switzerland of certain trademark issues foreclosed by a Stipulation and Order issued by Judge Debevoise earlier in the same action.
  • Ashford v. United States 1983 May 20
    The complaint is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction unless an Amended Complaint, with appropriate jurisdictional allegations, is filed within fourteen days.
  • Barlo Equip. Corp. v. Saddle River Tours 1983 March 18
    Defendant's petition to remove the civil action to federal court is denied and the action is remanded on the court's own motion to Superior Court, Middlesex County, New Jersey.
  • Bass River Assoc. v. Bass River Twp. 1983 September 16
    Plaintiffs seek estoppel of a local ordinance barring the development of a marina into a community of floating homes. Judgment is entered in favor of all defendants, against all plaintiffs, and the complaint is dismissed with costs.
  • Blieden v. Florescue 1983 November 22
    The action relates to a merger between Northern National Corporation and Horizon Bancorp. Plaintiff seeks to recover from holders of certain preferred stock in Northern National any proceeds from the merger with Horizon because of alleged violations of federal and New Jersey law; he proposes to reallocate those proceeds to the holders of common stock in Northern National. Of the five counts in the complaint, one is dismissed, three are retained, and one is dismissed in part and retained in part.
  • Blue v. U.S. Bureau of Alcohol 1983 February 14
    The civil rights action, stemming from the plaintiff's allegedly baseless arrest and conviction for possessing and distributing cocaine, is dismissed with prejudice as to defendant State of New Jersey, Department of Corrections.
  • Cap Gemini Sogeti v. Applied Data Research, Inc. 1983 August 04
    Affirms Judge John W. Devine's report and recommendation that the date to be selected for the rate of exchange between U.S. dollars and the French franc should be the date of any breach of contract, if the plaintiffs prevail in the action. Grants partial summary judgment for the plaintiffs and denies partial summary judgment for the defendants.
  • Caravella v. Mayberry 1983 April 15
    Although the plaintiff anticipates a denial of benefits from the Veterans' Administration because of the defendant's acts or omissions, such a denial has not occurred yet; therefore, the action is found to lack "ripeness." The defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed.
  • Carpet Masters v. Carpet Masters 1983 November 29
    The action, in which the plaintiff asserts a claim under state common law for "unfair competition and unfair trade practice," is remanded to the Chancery Division of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Monmouth County, because the plaintiff asserts no federal claim. "Just costs" but not attorney's fees are awarded to the plaintiff.
  • Clauso v. Studds 1983 September 28
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, seeks the resignation of defendant Studds from Congress and seeks to have "all like him . . . curtailed from voting on anything concerning religion or anything else." The action is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Davila v. Tard 1983 July 15
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that he has been deprived of several of his constitutional rights as a result of the disciplinary procedures followed by the defendants, employees of the Department of Corrections. Summary judgment is granted dismissing the complaint in its entirety.
  • Devine v. Handy 1983 June 14
    Denies the application of Frank N. Yurasko, an attorney retained by the Forum Insurance Company, to be relieved as counsel for Ronald Loalbo; Forum is estopped from denying coverage to Loalbo because Forum did not inform Loalbo in a timely fashion of a reservation of rights to later deny him coverage. Defendant Palleria's motion for summary judgment on immunity grounds is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to Palleria, with prejudice and without costs. Defendants Boyce and Susalis's motions for summary judgment on immunity grounds are continued pending completion of their depositions.
  • Diecidue v. Whitesmiths 1983 May 18
    The complaint is found to be defective in that it does not contain an affirmative allegation of facts on which the court must conclude that jurisdiction prevails. The plaintiff is given 14 days within which to file an amended complaint; otherwise, the complaint shall be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Esposito v. Mintz 1983 April 12
    Plaintiffs Esposito, Hughes, and Austin, prisoners, move for an order directing the state to pay their legal postage; the motion is denied because New Jersey Department of Corrections standards provide for the penal institution to pay for legal postage if the prisoners' personal funds are depleted. Plaintiff Esposito's motion for a temporary injunction prohibiting defendent Skowrowski from harassing him and denying him access to the court is denied because he has suffered no harm.
  • Fahey v. Carty 1983 May 20
    The defendant moves to deny the plaintiff's application for taxation of costs; the motion is partly granted and partly denied.
  • Feist & Feist Realty Corp. v. Hansford Prop. 1983 May 04
    Denies plaintiff's motion for an order directing the defendant to post a supersedeas bond.
  • First State Underwriters Agency of New England Reinsurance Corp. v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1983 September 28
    Defendant Certainteed's motion for leave to file amended answer, cross-claim, and counterclaim is granted. Defendant Certainteed's motion for leave to file a third-party complaint is denied; however, the Court enters an order providing for joinder of Rollins, Burdick Hunter Co. as a defendant, against whom Certainteed may file a cross-claim.
  • Fitzgerald v. Cmty. Mem'l Hosp. 1983 May 04
    Counsel for plaintiffs, Marc Weinberg, moves the Court to reconsider its earlier order denying his motion to be relieved of representing the plaintiffs in this case, alleging that the plaintiffs "wish to pursue this matter solely to harass the defendants." Alternatively, he moves for a stay of the trial until he obtains advice from a professional ethics committee. The motion is denied because Weinberg has not proffered basis for either knowledge or reasonable belief that the plaintiffs are maintaining the action in order to harass the defendants.
  • Foca v. Econ. Lab. 1983 May 13
    Denies the defendants' motion for reconsideration of the Court's earlier order of limited remand to the Superior Court of New Jersey for the purpose of resolving two conflicting orders from that court. Denies the plaintiffs' motion to remand the action to the Superior Court of New Jersey. Grants the defendants' motion for summary judgment and dismisses the plaintiffs' claims in their entirety because the plaintiffs are found to be re-litigating a claim for wrongful discharge already resolved in arbitration.
  • Gantt v. Western Union Tel. Co. 1983 January 26
    Dismisses the complaint because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted; allows the plaintiff 30 days in which to file an amended complaint.
  • Gary v. Evans 1983 October 20
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, complains of abusive language allegedly directed at him by the defendant, a prison guard. The complaint is dismissed because it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted and because it is frivolous.
  • Gilmore v. State 1983 July 11
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that he has been arbitrarily and discriminatorily denied parole, and argues that the New Jersey parole law are unconstitutional. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Gluck v. United States 1983 December 19
    Finds that the Supreme Court decision in United States v. Baggot is inapplicable. Grants the respondent's motion for summary enforcement of the subpoenas at issue, and dismisses the plaintiffs' motion to quash them.
  • Gordon v. Gordon 1983 March 02
    The case arises from the defendant's having recorded telephone conversations between the plaintiffs (the defendant's wife and her attorney) in anticipation of a divorce battle. Two counts of the complaint, pertaining to alleged violations of the wiretapping law, are dismissed with prejudice because the defendant is found not to have willfully violated the law. A third count, pertaining to invasion of privacy, is dismissed with prejudice subject to the plaintiffs' right to move formally to set aside or modify the order within 14 days.
  • Hall v. Hicks 1983 June 27
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, argues that he has been denied access to the courts due to alleged inadequacies of the law library at a youth correctional facility. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed because the plaintiff has suffered no actual injury and because the Court finds that the plaintiff was not deprived of access to the courts.
  • Hossic v. Mattingly 1983 March 02
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, argues that he has been subjected to medical malpractice and cruel and unusual punishment because prison officials have not accommodated his wish not to be served pork. No religious or serious medical reason for his avoidance of pork is alleged. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice because it is found to be frivolous.
  • Hotz v. Brown 1983 March 18
    The plaintiff, a jail inmate, argues that he has been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment because, when the flush toilet in his cell was broken for several days, he was not given full-time access to another flush toilet but was given a bucket to use part of the time. The defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint is granted because the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
  • Hough v. Bendix Corp. 1983 February 09
    The plaintiff's motion to reallocate the vicinage for a trial is denied.
  • Hunt v. Mercer County Super. Ct. 1983 December 08
    Grants the plaintiff leave to file in forma pauperis, but determines that the complaint is premature because the plaintiff's allegations are all claims which may directly affect the course of his prosecution upon pending State charges. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice.
  • James v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1983 February 02
    The plaintiff alleges that parole decisions are arbitrary, discriminatory, and based upon insufficient data. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice because the plaintiff fails to allege any facts which would support a cause of action against the members of the Parole Board.
  • Johns-Manville Sales Corp. v. W. R. Grace & Co. 1983 November 15
    In a tort case stemming from a roofing failure, plaintiff Johns-Manville moves to amend its complaint in order to add Center Realty and Tuschyn Roofing Co. as plaintiffs in the action. The Court orders that the motion will be granted only upon submission of a revised Amended Complaint containing adequate allegations of the jurisdictional amount of damages as to each plaintiff.
  • Kreuger Tech. v. Eco Recycling Serv. 1983 August 02
    Denies the defendant's petition to remove the case to federal court because the defendant, being a citizen of New Jersey, cannot claim diversity of citizenship. Remands the case to Superior Court, Chancery Division, Middlesex County, New Jersey.
  • Lieberman v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co. 1983 March 08
    In a case arising from a fire loss, the plaintiffs move for an order requiring the defendant, an unauthorized insurer, to deposit a bond with the court. The motion is denied. Instead of a bond, the Court accepts an affidavit by an official of the insurance company as satisfactory evidence that the company maintains sufficient funds to cover any judgment that may be rendered against it. The defendant is also ordered to file with the Court and serve upon the plaintiffs a copy of its annual report.
  • McKinney v. Hercules 1983 June 20
    The case is a Title VII civil rights action claiming workplace discrimination on the basis of race, sex, and disability; at issue is the defendants' response to the plaintiff's pregnancy. The case as to defendant Nowicki is dismissed because he was not named as a defendant in the plaintiff's complaints to the State Division on Civil Rights and the Federal EEOC, complaints which are prerequisites to the Title VII action. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the case is dismissed in its entirety, based on the Court's finding that the plaintiff was afforded equal benefits but refused them.
  • Monmouth Cablevision Assoc. v. Hastings 1983 July 15
    The defendant's motions for reconsideratoin of partial summary judgment or, in the alternative, for certification of that decision for interlocutory appeal are denied. The plaintiff's cross-motion for costs and attorney's fees is also denied.
  • Moody v. Tard 1983 July 08
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that the defendants, prison employees, negligently deprived him of his property by their unauthorized failure to follow prison procedures. The plaintiff's claim is fully cognizable under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act; consequently, it cannot be advanced as a § 1983 claim for a due process violation. The action is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Morris v. Hilton 1983 February 24
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that he has been subjected to cruel and unusual punishment because prison officials would not transfer him to a private hospital to undergo a tooth extraction under general anesthetic. The plaintiff refused to have the extraction done at the prison dental clinic under local anesthetic as suggested by defendant Rose, a dentist in private practice who renders dental services at the prison. Defendant Rose moves for summary judgment. The motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to defendant Rose because the dental care offered to the plaintiff does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment and because defendant Rose was not, under prison regulations, responsible for choosing the method of anesthesia offered to the plaintiff. Defendant Hilton moves for summary judgment. The motion is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to defendant Hilton because the dental care offered to the plaintiff does not constitute cruel and unusual punishment and because defendant Hilton was not, under prison regulations, responsible for choosing the method of anesthesia offered to the plaintiff and cannot be held liable under a theory of respondeat superior. The complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1983 February 10
    Plaintiff Muhammad moves that the defendants be found in contempt of court for failure to comply with a court order for discovery, that the defendants be charged a fine as punishment for their contempt of court, and that the defendants be assessed the costs of the motion. The motion is denied because the plaintiffs have complied with the court order in question, however tardily, and their tardiness is not prejudicial to the plaintiffs; because the request for fines is without support in the law and is without merit; and because the plaintiff, proceeding in forma pauperis, has incurred no costs. Plaintiff Muhammad moves for reconsideration of the denial of his previous motion. The motion for reconsideration is denied. Plaintiff Muhammad, a prisoner, asserts that he has been denied due process in three ways: first, because he was denied a disciplinary hearing to contest an on-the-spot correction; second, because there was no factual basis to support the guilty verdicts rendered at two disciplinary hearings; and, third, because defendant Casarella, who presided at two other hearings, harbored a personal bias toward plaintiff Muhammad and should have either disqualified himself or been reassigned by defendants Tard and Fauver. The court finds first, that plaintiff Muhammad received all the due process that he was due in the on-the-spot correction; second, that the hearing officers' rulings were supported by substantial, credible evidence; and third, that plaintiff Muhammad's claim of bias on the part of defendant Casarella is untimely and unsupported. Judgment is entered in defendants' favor on all counts of the complaint.
  • Obi v. Mazza 1983 May 09
    The defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is granted because the plaintiff failed to fulfill a precondition of filing a civil action by first seeking relief in the agency which discriminated against him.
  • Puchalski v. Tard 1983 April 04
    The defendants' motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted. The plaintiff's allegations that he was subjected to cruel and unusual punishment by being confined in pre-hearing detention fail to attain the level of an Eighth Amendment violation. The plaintiff's allegations that he was denied due process by the delay of a disciplinary hearing fail because the defendants conducted themselves in a reasonable manner and provided the plaintiff with the requisite process as quickly as possible.
  • Raywood v. Mercer County Bd. of Freeholders 1983 March 24
    The defendants move to dismiss the complaint on the ground that it fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or, in the alternative, for an order for a more definite statement. Both motions are denied without prejudice because the defendants' motions are inadequately supported.
  • Regulski v. Gale 1983 May 31
    The complaint is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Marine Midland Bank 1983 September 08
    Requests that counsel for the defendant submit revised answers to some of the plaintiff's interrogatories.
  • Robert Morris Educ. Ass'n v. Bd. of Ed. of South Bound Brook 1983 December 15
    The action arises from an incident in which defendant Cooley, Superintendent of Schools of South Bound Brook, prepared and distributed to parents, via school-children, a statement opposing Assembly Bill A-585, which if passed would permit school matters such as student testing, class size, teacher assignments, and promotions to be determined through collective bargaining. Plaintiffs, alleging violations of their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments as well as 42 U.S.C. § 1983, seek injunctive relief as well as costs and counsel fees. The court awards "lodestar" attorney's fees, disbursements, and filing fee to the plaintiffs. A permanent injunction enjoins the defendants and other employees of South Bound Brook schools from disseminating partisan political messages to students and orders the defendants to print and disseminate the plaintiffs' positional statement on the pending legislation opposed by the defendants.
  • Rob-E-Son v. E. D. Etnyre & Co. 1983 May 02
    The case pertains to a contract in which the defendant promised to build an asphalt manufacturing plant for the plaintiff; construction of the plant did not meet the requirements of the contract with respect to pollution controls and timely completion. The defendant brings five pretrial motions for partial summary judgment or analogous relief. One motion is denied and the other four are deferred or not considered.
  • Rodziewicz v. Feconda 1983 March 18
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, moves for an order that he be provided with copies of all pleadings, briefs, opinions, and orders without cost. The motion is dismissed without prejudice because it is premature, the plaintiff not having applied to proceed in forma pauperis.
  • Rountree v. Fenton 1983 March 29
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges various violations of his rights under the Fifth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments; the defendants move for summary judgment. Partial summary judgment is entered in favor of the defendants as to all claims of the plaintiff with the exception of his claim that his rights under the Eighth Amendment to be free from cruel and unusual punishment have been violated by alleged nutritional and hygienic deficiencies in the living conditions in his cell. The plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of that decision is denied.
  • Sarullo v. Dumont 1983 October 20
    In a case arising from an automobile collision involving Herman Kemmerling, Sr., Mary Kemmerling, and the defendant Edwin Dumont, the court rules on questions of set-off and prejudgment interest. Because the defendant has not established either Herman Kemmerling, Sr.'s status as a joint tortfeasor or any relative degree of his culpability, Mary Kemmerling is entitled to retain the full amount of the settlement from the Estate of Herman Kemmerling, Sr. and proceed to collect the full judgment rendered from the defendant. Prejudgment interest is denied to the Estate of plaintiff Mary Kemmerling because this plaintiff has already received amounts through a prior settlement substantially in excess of whatever prejudgment interest might be awarded.
  • Sine v. Balogh 1983 May 19
    The complaint is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction unless an Amended Complaint, with appropriate jurisdictional allegations, is filed within ten days.
  • Sowa v. United States 1983 May 13
    In a case arising from a drunk driving accident, with a combination of federal and non-federal defendants, the Court declares pendent party jurisdiction over the non-federal defendants.
  • Stanley v. White 1983 August 29
    The plaintiff, formerly a hearing officer and then a staff attorney at a state agency, claims that the defendants violated his Fourteenth Amendment rights to substantive and procedural due process because his job was terminated without good cause and he was not afforded a pre-termination departmental hearing when he was laid off from the agency due to financial exigency. On the plaintiff's and defendants' cross-motions for summary judgment, the Court enters summary judgment in the defendants' favor.
  • Stolzenthaler v. Auto-Life Mgmt. 1983 May 04
    The complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. The plaintiff, alleging that her employment was terminated on account of her sex, failed to file a claim with the EEOC, a procedural requirement of 42 U.S.C. § 2000e-5(f).
  • Thompson v. Dietz 1983 July 07
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, attempts to challenge the parole board's determination of his eligibility date, but the Court finds that an attack upon a parole elegibility determination is in reality a claim for an earlier release from confinement for which habeas corpus is the proper remedy. The complaint is dismissed with leave to reopen if the plaintiff exhausts state remedies without receiving adequate relief.
  • Troche v. Vliet 1983 August 05
    The complaint is dismissed without prejudice because the suit cannot be maintained absent the plaintiff's exhaustion of state remedies.
  • Tucker v. Fauver 1983 March 10
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that he has been deprived of several of his constitutional rights as a result of his transfer from Rahway State Prison to New Jersey State Prison at Trenton. With the exception of the plaintiff's allegations under the Eighth Amendment, the complaint is dismissed. The plaintiff is granted thirty days to secure affidavits relating to his living conditions at New Jersey State Prison at Trenton. The plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction condemning Wing Seven of the New Jersey State Prison at Trenton is denied because the plaintiff fails to present the requisite indicia of irreparable injury warranting injunctive relief. The plaintiff's motion requesting appointment of counsel to present his case is denied because the Court finds the plaintiff to be fully capable of presenting his grievances in an adequate manner.
  • Tucker v. Von Roll 1983 June 06
    The action arises from the accidental death of the plaintiff's husband, an amusement park maintenance worker, who was killed attempting to repair a cable car ride constructed and sold to the park by defendant Brock. An order of summary judgment is entered in favor of defendant Travelers Indemnity Company of Rhode Island because Travelers cannot be held liable on its contract with defendant Brock, which was not in effect at the time of the plaintiff's husband's accidental death.
  • Ukarish v. Magnesium Elektron 1983 March 01
    The plaintiff alleges that she was subjected to sexual harassment while working at Magnesium Elektron, Inc., a chemical plant, and that she received disparate treatment on the basis of her sex because she was fired following an altercation while male employees involved in altercations were allowed to keep their jobs. The Court finds that the plaintiff did not give her employers or co-workers any indication that the sexual language used in the plant was unwelcome to her and therefore the use of such language did not constitute sexual harassment. The Court also finds that the circumstances of the plaintiff's altercation and firing differ from the circumstances of other employees' altercations and therefore the plaintiff's firing is not an instance of sex discrimination. The complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
  • United States v. Curran 1983 July 12
    Summary judgment is granted in favor of the plaintiff for the accrued balances of principal and interest owed by the defendants on SBA loans.
  • United States v. One 1980 Chevrolet Corvette 1983 May 26
    Forfeiture of the Corvette in question, which was seized in conjunction with the arrests of several suspects in an illegal firearms sale, is granted to the plaintiff. Stanley Szostek (Senior), the father of one of the arrested suspects, claims to be the equitable owner of the Corvette, and contends that its forfeiture would be an injustice to him, but the Court finds that Szostek (Senior) is merely a lienor and advises him to petition the Attorney General of the United States for return of the vehicle.
  • United States v. Raymond 1983 January 26
    The defendants have been indicted for conspiracy and substantive offenses for fraudulent, excessive billings to the United States Army Electronics Command. Defendants' motion to dismiss counts 2 through 10 of the indictment is denied. The defendants seek an adjournment of the trial date for about three months; a shorter, two-month continuance is granted.
  • United States v. Salconi 1983 November 04
    The defendant, having pled guilty to conspiracy to possess and intent to distribute marijuana in excess of 1,000 pounds, is sentenced to 12 years in jail and fined $50,000. The fine is subsequently reduced to $20,000.
  • United States v. Tremarco 1983 February 24
    Defendant Tremarco's application for discovery is partly denied and partly disposed of without any further order.
  • Walker v. Steig 1983 September 12
    The plaintiffs' motion to join the defendant Hancox as third-party, as a direct defendant is granted after the Court determines that a non-resident plaintiff has equal access to the tolling provisions of the New Jersey Statute of Limitations.
  • Washington v. Hilton 1983 June 22
    The plaintiff's motion for the appointment of counsel is denied because the plaintiff has the ability to litigate the action without the assistance of counsel.
  • Williams v. Tard 1983 September 28
    The plaintiff, a prisoner lately transferred from one state prison to another, alleges that he has been deprived of his personal property (items which did not go with him in the transfer) without due process. The action is dismissed because the New Jersey Tort Claims Act offers an adequate post-deprivation remedy.
  • Ahart v. Ocean County Prosecutor's Office 1984 April 17
    The plaintiff, a pre-trial detainee on burglary charges, asserts that he is the victim of false arrest. The Court construes his complaints as petitions for writs of habeas corpus. The complaints are dismissed because they fail to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
  • Arizona Telco Fed. Credit Union v. Cumis Ins. Soc'y 1984 September 04
    The defendant is found to be subject to the personal jurisdiction of the Court because of the extent of its contacts with New Jersey; its motions for reargument and reconsideration are denied.
  • Bass River Assoc. v. Bass River Twp. 1984 January 24
    Grants the plaintiffs' motion to reduce the taxed costs by the amount of witness fees for an expert witness in accordance with a pre-trial agreement between the parties.
  • Bimbo v. Hilton 1984 January 24
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, contends that due to a lack of programs at Trenton State Prison his transfer there from Rahway State Prison constitutes punishment without due process of law. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Bullock v. Stiles 1984 June 05
    The plaintiff's request to consolidate his cases with others, which have proceeded further under another judge, is denied.
  • Burnett v. Monmouth County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 1984 January 18
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration; denies the plaintiff's motion for inclusion of certain documents as part of the record for purposes of appeal; and denies the defendant's request for attorney's fees.
  • Callaway v. Callaway 1984 June 19
    Permits the substitution of the United States as a party-defendant for defendants Mosley and the U.S. Post Office; denies the defendants' motion to dismiss the case on jurisdictional grounds.
  • Chatman v. Pilgrim Life Ins. Co. 1984 November 02
    As to defendant Pilgrim, one count of the complaint, alleging violations of ERISA, is dismissed. The court finds that Grace Chatman, the wife of William Chatman, does not have standing to sue under ERISA. Another count of the complaint, alleging that defendant Pilgrim is an "unauthorized insurer," is dismissed. Other counts of the complaint are dismissed because they fail to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The plaintiffs' demand for a jury trial is denied. Defendant Fund's motion to transfer the action to the Eastern District of Pennsylvania is denied.
  • Clark v. N.J. Bell Local 827 1984 January 06
    The defendants' motions for summary judgment are granted; the plaintiff's complaint is found to be clearly time barred under the six-month limitations period of the NLRA § 10(b). The entire complaint is dismissed.
  • Colon v. Brandt 1984 September 26
    The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted. The plaintiffs' claim for loss of and damage to their property is dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted. The claim of Alfred Colon alleging failure of medical treatment is dismissed.
  • Cometa Trading Co. v. Manuel Int'l 1984 November 30
    Denies the defendant's motion to reverse an earlier order by Judge Devine awarding attorney's fees to the plaintiff.
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1984 December 07
    Conditionally grants the defendants' application to file and serve a Second Amended Counterclaim.
  • Corsi v. Tard 1984 June 26
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, asserts that his right to due process was violated when prison officials confiscated a portable fan from his cell. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Crane v. Fauver 1984 May 21
    Two prison guards, fired from their jobs and since reinstated, assert that they were deprived of their right to due process. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice because the matter is not ripe for presentation to the federal court.
  • Dick Carlisi Auto Body Corp. v. Steepy 1984 September 26
    The owner of a towing business which was struck from the township's towing list asserts that he has been deprived of the right to due process. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed. The order of summary judgment is affirmed on appeal.
  • Donovan v. Opatut 1984 February 01
    Settles a dispute as to the appraised value of real property offered by the defendants as partial payment of the amount due under a consent order.
  • Evans v. Tard 1984 December 19
    The defendant's motion for judgment on the pleadings is granted. The Court finds that the plaintiff fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
  • Fell v. Kapsak 1984 April 04
    Because on all issues presented to the Court the plaintiff appears to have failed to exhaust available remedies, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to renew his claims at the proper time.
  • Fitzpatrick v. I.V. DiMartino 1984 February 01
    The plaintiff, an attorney licensed in Pennsylvania, sues the Superior Court of New Jersey and one of its judges for failure to grant him admission pro hac vice in order to try a medical malpractice case. The defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint, supported by reference to the Supreme Court case Leis v. Flynt, is unopposed by the plaintiff and is granted.
  • Foy v. Fauver 1984 September 28
    The complaint is dismissed without prejudice as frivolous because it appears that there are no legal points arguable on their merits and because the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.
  • Foy v. Tard 1984 September 20
    The complaint is dismissed against defendant F. J. Cottone, M.D., for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted against defendant Cottone.
  • Gluck v. United States 1984 April 04
    The plaintiffs' motion for a reconsideration of an earlier decision by the same Court is denied. The plaintiffs' request for a stay of enforcement of the earlier decision is denied.
  • Golin v. FMC Corp. 1984 February 01
    The plaintiff's request for permission to amend the complaint for a second time is granted.
  • Han v. Food and Nutrition Serv. 1984 March 08
    The plaintiff seeks a review of a decision of the Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service withdrawing his authorization to participate in the Federal Food Stamp Program. Authorization was withdrawn following an investigation in which the defendants determined that the plaintiff had committed violations of the Food Stamp Program by accepting food stamps in exchange for non-food merchandise. The defendant moves for judgment on the pleadings or, in the alternative, for summary judgment. The plaintiff contends that this motion should be denied because of issues of material fact. The plaintiff seeks disclosure of the names of individuals who participated in the investigation; the defendant claims that these names are exempt from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. Defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied, without prejudice to its renewal after completion of discovery. Defendant's motion for a protective order is also denied. Moreover, the Court orders that the defendants provide complete and responsive answers to the plaintiff's interrogatories.
  • Hinton v. Schroth 1984 June 25
    The complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without costs.
  • Hochman v. Zenith Radio Corp. 1984 July 03
    The action is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Holme v. United States 1984 November 28
    The amended complaint as to Rutgers University is dismissed with prejudice and with costs to the plaintiff because the plaintiff did not file a notice of claim against defendant Rutgers within the period of time prescribed by state law.
  • Irizarry v. Level Line, Inc. 1984 July 11
    Affirms the arbitrator's decision in an employment dispute and grants the defendant's motion for summary judgment, dismissing the complaint with prejudice and without costs.
  • Jackson v. Shibe 1984 September 04
    Denies defendant Division of Employment Services' motion to dismiss the case on Eleventh Amendment grounds because the New Jersey Tort Claims Act permits individuals to sue the state.
  • Kovack v. N.J. State Parole Bd. 1984 February 09
    Finds that the action is one for a writ of habeas corpus and that the plaintiff has failed to exhaust the remedies available in the state courts; dismisses the complaint in its entirety.
  • La Torre v. Fauver 1984 July 13
    The complaint is dismissed as frivolous because it appears that there are no legal points arguable on their merits. Alternatively, on its face the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The dismissal is without prejudice to any claims which might inure to the plaintiff should he not be afforded due process of law in pursuing a claim under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act.
  • La Torre v. Zelinski 1984 July 13
    The complaint is dismissed as frivolous because it appears that there are no legal points arguable on their merits. Alternatively, on its face the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. The dismissal is without prejudice to any claims which might inure to the plaintiff should he not be afforded due process of law in pursuing a claim under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act.
  • Laborers' Local Union Nos. 472 & 172 v. Agabiti Bros. 1984 January 24
    Affirms the arbitrator's decision in a dispute over delinquent payments to union funds.
  • Laufgas v. Janes 1984 November 13
    Awards attorneys' fees to the prevailing parties in a case previously resolved by summary judgment.
  • Lieberman v. Interstate Fire & Cas. Co. 1984 November 02
    In a case arising from a fire loss, all claims of plaintiff Lieberman are dismissed as to both defendants named in his Fourth Amended Complaint, and all claims of plaintiff Chevra Lomdei Torah against defendant Interstate are dismissed. Certain claims of Chevra Lomdei Torah against defendant Perlstein remain for further disposition.
  • Luiz v. Heckler 1984 October 25
    Finds that the defendant's decision to deny disability benefits to the plaintiff was not based on substantial evidence. Remands the case to the defendant.
  • Macon v. Twp. of Old Bridge 1984 February 29
    The civil rights case arises from a situation in which the police, having received a tip about a violent protest allegedly being orchestrated by individuals in vehicles of certain descriptions, matched the plaintiff and her vehicle to the tip descriptions and stopped and searched her. Grants the defendants' motions for summary judgment, without costs.
  • Martin v. Heckler 1984 October 11
    Determines that the plaintiff, who received an unfavorable decision in a suit over denial of disability benefits, cannot be awarded attorneys fees.
  • McClintock v. Griffith 1984 April 17
    The civil rights complaint stems from alleged discrepancies between a police officer's written report and trial testimony. Because it appears from the pleading that the plaintiff has not exhausted available state remedies, the complaint is dismissed without prejudice to the plaintiff's right to reopen after state remedies have been exhausted.
  • McClintock v. Somerset County Prosecutor's Office 1984 April 19
    The complaint is dismissed as frivolous for various reasons including the immunity of defendant Shale and relevant statutes of limitations.
  • Miller v. Tard 1984 September 20
    The complaint arises from an incident in which the plaintiff, a prisoner, was temporarily denied access to religious services at the prison by two unnamed guards. The court finds that the defendant is not liable to the plaintiff. The defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Monmouth Cablevision Assoc. v. Hastings 1984 September 20
    The case arises from a dispute over the proper purchase price to be paid by the plaintiff after it has exercised its option to purchase partnership shares from the defendant. The court denies the defendant's motion for an order directing the plaintiff to deposit in escrow, in an interest-bearing account, a certain sum of money.
  • Moon v. Ross 1984 December 04
    The complaint is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction over defendant Sharpe.
  • Mugmuk v. Klein 1984 October 05
    Grants the defendants' motion for partial summary judgment and dismisses the first count of the complaint.
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1984 February 09
    Plaintiff Muhammad's application for preliminary injunctive relief is declined. A letter from Deputy Attorney General Stiles requests that defendants be given custody of 4 of the 50 pills submitted by plaintiff Muhammad, in order to identify the substance. Custody of four pills is granted to the defendants.
  • N.Y. Coat, Suit, Dress, Rainwear v. Penny Fashions 1984 January 06
    Confirms the award of an arbitrator in a dispute between a garment workers' union and a garment manufacturer.
  • Pizzo v. Cosella 1984 June 12
    The plaintiff alleges that the defendants committed legal malpractice by failing to sue for injuries caused to her son by a snowplow. The court orders that at trial the plaintiff shall have the burden of proof as to the collectibility of any judgment that might have been obtained against the potential defendants in the underlying injury case.
  • Ragins v. Super. Ct. 1984 February 01
    The complaint is dismissed without prejudice because the action is premature for failure of the plaintiff to exhaust state remedies.
  • Rago v. Breining 1984 October 30
    In a case arising from a fatal drunk driving accident, judgment is entered for defendants-third party plaintiffs Breining, Breining, and Richey's, jointly, and against the third party defendant, Estate of Debra Coleman.
  • Raleigh v. Rockwell Int'l Corp. 1984 January 24
    Both plaintiff's and defendants' motions for leave to amend pleadings are granted.
  • Rasheed v. Cannon 1984 May 30
    The case is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Raynor v. United States 1984 October 29
    The case arises from the sale of a house to the plaintiff by defendant HUD. The complaint is dismissed as to defendants United States of America and Secretary of Housing and Urban Development because the plaintiff fails to establish that they owed a duty to her under any relevant theory of liability. Summary judgment is granted to defendant Clarion Mortgage Company dismissing the complaint of the plaintiff and the crossclaims of Stanford Slovin and Town and Country Realty, Inc. Rosemary Peters of the Bureau of National Affairs writes to obtain a copy of the decision in the Raynor case, and Elizabeth Kenny, secretary to Judge Bissell, replies.
  • Raywood v. Mercer County Bd. of Freeholders 1984 May 15
    Grants the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint because the plaintiff, acting pro se, has refused to respond to interrogatories.
  • Remington Rand Corp. v. Marine Midland Bank 1984 January 27
    Denies defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction.
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1984 July 19
    The case arises from the alleged kidnapping of a child, plaintiff Tiffany Rothschild, by her non-custodial parent subsequent to a divorce. The Court maintains subject matter jurisdiction over the case and rules that the venue is proper. The Court defers ruling on defendant Pangborn's alleged quasi-judicial immunity as a guardian ad litem. Defendant Pangborn's motions for dismissal are denied. Plaintiff's attorney Andrews moves for dismissal of defendant Pangborn's counterclaim against him for defamation; the motion is granted and Pangborn's counterclaim is dismissed.
  • Ryans v. N.J. Comm'n for the Blind & Visually Impaired 1984 August 31
    Grants the plaintiff's request for an order correcting his middle initial in the typed signature line of an earlier consent order.
  • Ryans v. Soc. Sec. Admin. 1984 May 04
    Grants the defendants' motion to supplement the record on appeal.
  • Saccenti v. Int'l Business Machines Corp. 1984 July 12
    The plaintiffs' motion for voluntary dismissal without prejudice is granted. Costs are awarded to the defendant.
  • Segnit v. Nat'l R.R. Passenger Corp. 1984 January 27
    The complaint, alleging wrongful termination as well as negligence and carelessness, is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Simcha Kosher Caterers v. Ins. Co. of N. America 1984 March 28
    The plaintiff alleges that the defendant has refused to pay out insurance benefits without good cause. The court grants the defendant's motion for partial summary judgment, dismissing the plaintiff's claims for punitive damages.
  • Simmons v. Tard 1984 January 27
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for the entry of default and grants the defendants' motion for an extension of time in which to file their answer.
  • Slater v. Hannay 1984 June 06
    Remands the case to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Chancery Division, Ocean County.
  • Smith v. Amerada Hess Corp. 1984 April 05
    The plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunctive relief is denied and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety. A letter from John E. Flynn, assistant vice president of Commerce Clearinghouse Inc., requests permission to report the opinion in that company's Trade Regulation Reports.
  • Soto v. Lee Filters, Inc. 1984 February 01
    Although the plaintiff has exhausted internal remedies, the defendants' motions for summary judgment are granted and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety. The case, a claim for racial discrimination in the workplace, is barred by the doctrine of res judicata. The plaintiff has not established a prima facie case of racially discriminatory discharge. The plaintiff's allegations that defendant Local 260 discriminated against him and failed to comply with its duty of fair representation are without merit.
  • Stoklasek v. HAD Realty 1984 September 27
    A letter to plaintiff Stoklasek informs him that his complaint is dismissed, without prejudice, for lack of federal jurisdiction.
  • Terrell v. Tard 1984 February 09
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for the entry of default and grants the defendants' motion for an extension of time in which to file their answer.
  • Tucker v. Fauver 1984 March 12
    The complaint, alleging that conditions at the New Jersey State Prison at Trenton constitute a violation of the Eighth Amendment prohibition of cruel and unusual punishment, is dismissed in its entirety.
  • Tucker v. Tard 1984 September 07
    Grants the defendants' motion for judgment on the pleadings, finding that the plaintiff's constitutional rights have not been violated by the loss or theft of his personal property at the time of his transfer from one state prison to another.
  • Uhrin v. Maldonado 1984 February 01
    The case arises from a collision between the plaintiff's vehicle and a U.S. Postal Service vehicle operated by defendant Maldonado. The court grants three motions by the defendant: first, to substitute the U.S. as the defendant; second, to set aside the entry of default; and third, to grant summary judgment and dismiss the action with prejudice.
  • United States v. Artishenko 1984 June 08
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on various counts of the complaint.
  • United States v. Cuthbertson 1984 June 29
    The defendants, having pled guilty in a fraud case involving restaurant franchises, petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to have their guilty pleas vacated, claiming that the pleas were coerced. The court finds their claims of coercion unconvincing and declines to vacate the defendants' guilty pleas. The decision is affirmed by the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.
  • United States v. Escarda 1984 June 18
    The court declines to alter its findings for sentencing purposes after the defendant pleads guilty and is sentenced on drug charges.
  • United States v. Garcia 1984 June 18
    The court declines to alter its findings for sentencing purposes after the defendant pleads guilty and is sentenced on drug charges.
  • United States v. Morton-Thiokol Corp. 1984 November 15
    Finds that the plaintiff should be permitted to pursue certain claims. Denies the plaintiff's motion for reconsideration of an earlier decision.
  • United States v. Silva 1984 March 01
    The court grants several requests for corrections to the record but declines to alter its findings for sentencing purposes after the defendant pleads guilty and is sentenced on drug charges.
  • Allen v. Alfacell Corp. 1985 September 13
    Denies the defendants' motion for reconsideration of an earlier decision which discarded some counts of the complaint but retained others. Denies the defendants' request to certify the issue of the statute of limitations as a controlling issue, citing questions of fact. Denies the defendants' request for interlocutory appeal.
  • Altamura v. News World Commc'n 1985 October 04
    Grants motions by defendants News World Communications and Bo Hi Pak to dismiss the action, a suit for defamation and placing the plaintiff in a false light. The action is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
  • Am. Centennial Ins. Co. v. Underwriters, Inc. 1985 November 14
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on certain counts of defendants' counterclaims. Denies the plaintiff's motion to dismiss certain counts of defendants' counterclaims. Dismisses certain counts of defendants' counterclaims alleging abuse of process for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Am. Equip. Leasing Co. v. Tecchio 1985 February 12
    Grants summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff on the plaintiff's motion and on the defendant's counterclaim.
  • Baron v. McClure 1985 September 18
    The complaint is dismissed as frivolous and because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Battle v. County of Union 1985 August 22
    Grants the motion for summary judgment by defendants State of New Jersey and New Jersey State Police. The plaintiff's claims against these defendants are barred by the Eleventh Amendment. Dismisses two counts of the complaint as to defendants State of New Jersey and New Jersey State Policewith prejudice because they are barred by the Eleventh Amendment; dismisses another count of the complaint as to defendants State of New Jersey and New Jersey State Police without prejudice, for lack of pendent jurisdiction and wrongful choice of forum.
  • Bennett v. Wiechnik 1985 August 22
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims to have been unfairly punished for his involvement in a prison fight. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendants. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
  • Bertram Music Co. v. Park Vending 1985 February 04
    In a case arising from violations of copyright on musical compositions, the defendant disputes the costs claimed by the plaintiffs. The Court enters judgment on behalf of the plaintiffs, with attorneys fees and taxable costs, noting that the computation and allowance of the taxable costs must be pursued under the General Rules of the Court.
  • Blohm v. Giordano 1985 March 15
    Denies the plaintiff's application to amend the complaint. Orders that a previously-filed order of dismissal remain in effect. Denies the plaintiff's application for further reconsideration of the dismissal.
  • Blohm v. Springfield Twp. Mun. Ct. 1985 May 07
    Rules that the court does not have diversity jurisdiction over the case. Dismisses the action without prejudice because the policy of federal non-interference with pending state court judicial proceedings so requires.
  • Blohm v. West Windsor Twp. 1985 May 14
    The action is dismissed as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Boinides v. El Diario La Prensa 1985 July 03
    In a case arising from the misprinting of a classified advertisement, the court grants the motion for summary judgment in favor of defendant Gannett News Service and dismisses the complaint as to that defendant, with prejudice and without costs. Dismisses the complaint as to co-defendant El Diario La Prensa, without prejudice or costs, for lack of prosecution.
  • Brown v. Foley 1985 June 20
    Denies the defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint. Denies the plaintiff's motions to add additional plaintiffs and to secure the appointment of pro bono counsel.
  • Butler Mfg. Co. v. Kuhn & Jacob Molding & Tool Co. 1985 December 19
    Defendant General Electric's motion for summary judgment on certain counts of the complaint is denied. Defendant General Electric's motion for summary judgment on other counts of the complaint is granted; those counts are dismissed, with prejudice and without cost, because they are time barred.
  • Caldwell v. Mobil Chem. Co. 1985 April 29
    Grants the defendant's motion for summary judgment. A letter from the editorial department of West Publishing Company requests a copy of the opinion in this case; Judge Bissell, in a handwritten note, refuses.
  • Callaway v. Callaway 1985 September 12
    In a case arising from an automobile accident between a postal vehicle and a private vehicle in which the plaintiff was a passenger, the defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint as against the United States is dismissed. The action as to the remaining parties is remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Monmouth County.
  • Cameron v. Corr. Inst. for Women 1985 February 01
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that she has not been granted adequate medical attention for an injury to her leg. The Court finds that the plaintiff's injury is not serious and that she has had access to medical evaluation. Summary judgment in favor of the defendants is granted and the plaintiff's claims for compensatory and punitive damages are dismissed, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Carretta Trucking v. Underwriters at Lloyd's of London 1985 December 09
    The defendant's request for partial summary judgment striking the plaintiff's claim for counsel fees is granted. Because the plaintiff has no private right of action to allege unfair claim settlement practices, the defendant's motion for summary judgment on all claims for damages based upon the defendant's alleged unfair claim settlement practices is granted.
  • Cerwinski v. U.S. Dep't of Agric. 1985 May 07
    The defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied because there are genuine issues of material fact.
  • Christopher v. Keister 1985 November 13
    The plaintiff's application for a preliminary injunction is denied, without costs. Grants the application of the firm of Hellring, Lindeman, Goldstein, Siegal & Greenberg to be relieved as counsel for the defendents.
  • Claiborne v. Heckler 1985 August 15
    Affirms the Secretary of Health and Human Services' decision to deny SSI benefits to the plaintiff, finding that the plaintiff's only credible impairment is controllable by medication and there is insufficient medical evidence of other impairments.
  • Clauso v. Tard 1985 June 20
    The plaintiff's application for an Order to Show Cause and a Temporary Restraining Order directing that certain medical treatment be provided to him is denied. The plaintiff's Motion for the Issuance of a Warrant for the arrest of a doctor for contempt of court based upon the filing of an allegedly false affidavit concerning the plaintiff's medical condition is denied. The defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment is denied.
  • Compolattaro v. O'Lone 1985 June 18
    The Report and Recommendation of John W. Devine, United States Magistrate, is adopted in toto as the Court's own decision. Accordingly, the plaintiff's petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed, without evidentiary hearing or certificate of probable cause.
  • Condone v. Reagan 1985 March 27
    The defendants' motion for an order requiring the plaintiff to plead more specifically the allegations contained in the complaint is denied because the defendants have already filed their Answer.
  • Cruz v. Marine Transp. Lines 1985 March 27
    The United States' motion for summary judgment brought on behalf of Marine Transport is granted. The United States' request that sanctions be imposed on the plaintiff is denied because the plaintiff's complaint is not deemed to have been interposed frivolously or for an improper purpose.
  • Cutler v. Morris 1985 January 21
    The plaintiff's motion to strike certain defenses is granted, based on the Report and Recommendation of John W. Devine, United States Magistrate.
  • Davis v. Neubert 1985 October 16
    The petitioner seeks issuance of a writ of habeas corpus because of an error made by the prosecution in the petitioner's trial on drug charges. The petition for habeas corpus relief is dismissed without an evidentiary hearing and without a certificate of probable cause.
  • Donaghy v. Roudebush 1985 February 19
    The plaintiffs claim that property sold to them by the defendant United States is uninsurable and unmarketable because it is "clouded" by previous liens. Because the plaintiffs cannot establish that their title is uninsurable or truly "clouded," or that the bank is going to foreclose on their property, summary judgment is entered declaring the plaintiffs' title to be free of liens and dismissing the amended complaint as against the United States.
  • Doron v. F.W. Woolworth Co. 1985 May 13
    Dismisses the plaintiff's claims for violation of his common law contractual rights because the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination provides a statutory remedy. Determines that the plaintiff is not entitled to a trial by jury.
  • Dunmore v. Manning 1985 May 31
    Grants motion by defendant Mattingly (erroneously named Manning in the complaint) to dismiss. Dismisses the case as to defendants Bradman and Hollums sua sponte.
  • Fasick v. Hilton 1985 February 05
    Affirms the ruling of Magistrate Devine denying the petitioner's application to proceed in forma pauperis. Denies the petitioner's application for the appointment of pro bono counsel.
  • In re Feldman 1985 December 04
    Defendant Chemical Bank's motion for a stay pending appeal is denied.
  • G. & J.K. Enter. v. City of South Amboy 1985 February 01
    Dismisses the defendant Police Department of the City of South Amboy as a party to the action because the police department is an agent of the municipal corporation, not a separate legal entity. Dismisses "Members of the Police Dept. of the City of South Amboy" as defendents in the action because "Members . . ." is not specific enough, but permits the plaintiffs to amend the complaint to add specific officers or "John Does." Grants defendant Warn's motion for summary judgment in part, but denies summary judgment as to plaintiff's claims based upon allegations of illegal search and seizure and detention without bail.
  • Gamble v. City of Toms River 1985 April 04
    Permits the plaintiff to proceed in forma pauperis. Dismisses the complaint because the plaintiff has not exhausted other legal remedies.
  • Hardgove v. Fauver 1985 June 21
    Denies the plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration of the Court's prior order of consolidation. Dismisses the plaintiffs' motion for simultaneous access to the law library of Trenton State Prison. Denies the plaintiffs' motion for appointment of counsel.
  • Harper v. Fauver 1985 March 21
    The defendants' motion for an order requiring the plaintiff to plead more specifically the allegations contained in the complaint is denied because the defendants have already filed their Answer. The plaintiffs' motion for reconsideration of the Court's prior order of consolidation is denied. The plaintiffs' motion for simultaneous access to the law library of Trenton State Prison is denied. The plaintiffs' motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
  • Hayes v. Kean 1985 October 10
    The plaintiffs argue that state prison inmates who have been sentenced pursuant to New Jersey's old sex offender law, which statutorily bars a prisoner from earning commutation time credits, are denied equal protection of the laws because they are prevented from earning commutation credits while inmates sentenced under the new sex offender law are not. The Court reasons that sentences under the old law were determined to take into account the unavailability of commutation time credits. The Court also points out that prisoners sentenced under the old law may apply to be resentenced under the new law and thereby gain access to commutation time credits. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice.
  • Huertas v. Marine Transp. Lines 1985 November 20
    In a seaman's personal injury case, the defendant's motion to transfer the suit to the Central District of California is granted.
  • Jabbar v. O'Lone 1985 September 11
    The plaintiff's application for a preliminary injunction is denied.
  • Jenin v. Scheidemantel 1985 June 17
    The Court adopts and incorporates in toto the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Devine dismissing the plaintiff's petition for a writ of habeas corpus because the plaintiff has not exhausted state remedies.
  • Jersey Paving Co. v. Fidelity & Deposit Co. 1985 March 01
    The cases all arise from non-payment for work done under a subcontract with Marandino Construction Company, now bankrupt. A previous Order of Consolidation in these cases is vacated for all intents and purposes. The cases are all remanded to other courts.
  • Lentz v. Mac Tools 1985 September 10
    The complaint is dismissed with prejudice. In response to a counterclaim, an injunction is issued enjoining the plaintiff from the use of the trademarks, logos, service marks, etc. of Mac Tools in connection with the conduct of the plaintiff's business.
  • Lidman v. Smith 1985 November 21
    Denies motions for summary judgment by defendants Smith, Proctor, and Blue. Grants motions for summary judgment by defendants Newark Redevelopment and Housing Authority and Buck.
  • Lukas v. Nat'l Benefit Life Ins. Co. 1985 January 17
    Dismisses the plaintiff's claims for punitive damages and emotional distress. Denies the plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint because the amendment fails to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. Grants the defendant's cross-motion to strike the plaintiff's claims for punitive damages and emotional distress.
  • Lynch v. W. Johnson 1985 April 15
    The action is dismissed as to defendants Budd Company and Wolf because statute law provides them with a complete defense. Defendants Budd Company and Wolf are also granted attorneys' fees and costs arising from the suit because they are clearly immune from suit and the plaintiff's allegations against them are frivolous, unreasonable, and without foundation. Defendant Johnson's motion for summary judgment is granted because the plaintiff fails to state a claim under any of the laws that he cites and because defendant Johnson is qualifiedly immune from the suit. The complaint is dismissed.
  • Malone v. Ford Motor Co. 1985 January 21
    The defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint is granted only in part and denied in part.
  • Master Diamond Wholesalers Corp. v. Santana 1985 January 16
    The plaintiff's motion to dismiss without prejudice the counterclaim of defendant Dale Santana alleging malicious prosecution is granted.
  • McBride v. Sperber 1985 November 19
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, seeks free copies of his trial transcripts from the defendants, employees of the public defender's office. The Defendants' motion to dismiss the complaint is granted. The plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1985 November 29
    Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey. At issue is whether the United States Magistrate, as affirmed by the district court, properly imposed against the plaintiff for his failure to comply with discovery orders the sanction of precluding introduction of evidence which the defendants had requested and which the plaintiff had failed to deliver. The lower court's order granting summary judgment to defendants Komatsu-Gosho is vacated and the case is remanded to the district court.
  • Monroe v. Beyers 1985 June 20
    Denies the motion by the plaintiffs, prisoners at Trenton State Prison, for a preliminary injunction that would afford them increased access to the prison law library. Denies the plaintiffs' motion for default judgment. Grants the defendants' motion for an extension of time to answer or plead.
  • Muhammad v. Fauver 1985 March 21
    The plaintiff's motion for entry of default is denied, and the defendants' motion for additional time ot answer is granted.
  • Napier v. Philips 1985 September 11
    The plaintiff's motion for consolidation of cases is granted for limited purposes but denied without prejudice for any other purposes. The plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint is denied.
  • Nataraj v. United States 1985 November 15
    Judgment is entered on behalf of the defendant with regard to the first, second, and fourth claims for relief in the complaint.
  • Olitsky v. Rafferty 1985 August 22
    The petition for a writ of habeas corpus is dismissed with prejudice and without costs because the petitioner's claims have been satisfied and rendered moot by the completion of direct appeal proceedings in state court.
  • Paranee v. Twel 1985 March 06
    The wrongful death claim arises from a fatal drunk driving incident allegedly caused by the defendants serving alcohol to an underaged boy. The complaint is dismissed because the period of limitation has run out.
  • Pasqua v. Essex County 1985 June 14
    The plaintiff, making a due process claim, seeks the return of a number of bullet proof vests that were taken from him by the police. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous and because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Rockwell Int'l v. Midland Transp. Co. 1985 September 24
    Defendant WTC Air Freight's motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to WTC. Defendant Midland Transport Co.'s motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Rodriguez v. Nat'l Eng'g Co. 1985 September 16
    Defendant Whiting Corporation's motion for summary judgment on the strict liability claims of the complaint is denied, and its motion to dismiss claims of the complaint based solely upon negligence is granted.
  • Roehsler v. Karcher 1985 January 23
    In a civil rights case arising from the aftermath of a dog attack, some counts are dismissed in whole, in part, or with respect to certain defendants; all other motions for summary judgment addressed in this opinion are denied, without prejudice.
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1985 March 12
    The case arises from the alleged kidnapping of a child, plaintiff Tiffany Rothschild, by her non-custodial parent subsequent to a divorce. The motion by defendants State of New Jersey and Robert N. Cifelli for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed as to those defendants, with prejudice and without costs. The motions of defendant Kenneth R. Pangborn for dismissal of the complaint are denied. The motion of defendant Kenneth R. Pangborn for protective orders regarding the taking of his deposition by the plaintiffs is dismissed, without prejudice. Motions by defendants Sam Rothschild and Evelyn Rothschild for dismissal and/or for summary judgment are denied, with the exception that any and all claims alleged against them predicated upon 42 U.S.C. § 1985 are dismissed.
  • Say v. Smith 1985 December 20
    In a prisoner abuse case, one earlier order by a magistrate is affirmed; another earlier order by a magistrate is overruled and defendants' witnesses are directed to answer the deposition questions.
  • Shakoor v. Fauver 1985 December 12
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, argues that his civil rights have been violated by the non-delivery of his mail. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted, dismissing the present complaint as to defendants John Doe, Postmaster, Trenton Post Office and John Doe, Postmaster Asbury Park Post Office. Based on the plaintiff's failure to demonstrate unreasonable acts and lack of good faith, the defendants are entitled to qualified immunity from suit for their acts.
  • Shane v. Tard 1985 October 31
    The plaintiff, a prisoner transferred from North Carolina to New Jersey, argues that his concommitant change of status from medium to high security constitutes a violation of his due process rights. Summary judgment is granted to the defendants, dismissing the plaintiff's complaint with prejudice and without costs.
  • Simmons v. Tard 1985 November 27
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, argues that his civil rights were violated when a cell door closed on his fingers, causing him injury. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without costs.
  • Stover v. Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. 1985 March 01
    The plaintiffs move to vacate certain parts of an earlier court order. The order remains in full force and effect, but plaintiff System Council U-3, IBEW is granted permission to file an amended complaint challenging the arbitration award which is the subject of this action.
  • Swangler v. Tard 1985 August 22
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, argues that his equal protection rights have been violated by the restrictions placed by prison officials on prisoners' eligibility to run for election to the Prisoners' Representative Committee. Summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendant and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety.
  • United States v. Caballero 1985 September 24
    The defendant, convicted of conspiring to possess with the intent to distribute nearly eight tons of marijuana, moves to have the length of his sentence shortened. The motion is denied.
  • United States v. DeLuca 1985 March 18
    The defendant's motion for discovery and inspection of grand jury minutes other than those of the defendant's testimony is denied. A ruling on the defendant's motion for disclosure of the statements of alleged co-conspirators is deferred until those statements can be inspected by the court in camera. The government is ordered to disclose to defense counsel the names and addresses of "knowledgeable" persons whom the government does not intend to call as witnesses in its case in chief, plus the names and addresses of any known attorneys for such persons. Application for disclosure of the identity of those persons whom the government does intend to call as witnesses in its case in chief is denied. The defendant moves for a Bill of Particulars. The government agrees to furnish the names unindicted co-conspirators known to the government. The government is also ordered to particularize information omitted or summarized in certain counts against the defendant. In other respects, the defendant's motion for a Bill of Particulars is denied. The defendant moves for dismissal, arguing that he has been denied his right to a speedy trial, but the motion is denied.
  • United States v. Ewing 1985 May 28
    The defendant, convicted of stealing and cashing a tax refund check in order to finance his drug habit, appeals his conviction on the grounds that his Miranda rights were violated. The appeal is denied and dismissed, with prejudice and without costs.
  • United States v. Lindsley 1985 July 05
    The Court recommends to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit that the defendant/appellant Lindsley not be accorded in forma pauperis status regarding the payment of fees and costs that may be required in the prosecution of the appeal, but that the appointment of attorney Krovatin as his assigned counsel be afforded to the appellant regarding his legal representation before the appeals court.
  • United States v. Sardina 1985 October 17
    Grants defendant Sardina's motion to have his name redacted from the statement made by his co-defendant Fernandez.
  • United States v. Serpone 1985 June 17
    Denies the defendant's motion for reconsideration of the court's previous denial of his motion for a reduction of sentence.
  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1985 November 19
    The case concerns ten slot machines seized at Port Newark. The Court determines that the machines in question are slot machines capable of redeeming free plays for money and, as such, that they are gambling devices; that the seizure by the Customs Service was not ultra vires its authority; that claimant Universe Affiliated International was deprived of its property without due process of law; and that the seizure of the machines was without support in law as the State of New Jersey has exempted itself from the Gambling Devices Act. The claimant Universe Affiliated International's motion for summary judgment is granted and the Government's motion for summary judgment is denied. The Government is directed to turn over to the claimant the seized property.
  • Wells v. Consol. Rail Corp. 1985 January 21
    Denies the plaintiff's motion to remand the action to the Superior Court of New Jersey.
  • White v. Van Lieu 1985 February 05
    Denies the plaintiff's request for the appointment of private counsel to represent him without fee.
  • Whitted v. Zelinski 1985 March 12
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that he was deprived of property without due process when guards left his room unsecured and his property was taken by other prisoners. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous and because it fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Wyckoff v. Wyckoff 1985 December 04
    The plaintiff's motion to fix the amount of her dower interest and to order the clerk of court to turn that fixed amount over to her is denied.
  • Alston v. Fauver 1986 December 01
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that his constitutional rights have been violated by disciplinary procedures taken against him after a sharpened instrument was found in his cell. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the complaint is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
  • Anastasio v. Schering Corp. 1986 September 25
    The defendant is ordered to pay the plaintiff's attorneys' fees and expenses following the successful prosecution of the action.
  • Asken v. Quinn 1986 November 10
    The plaintiff, a postal service employee injured on the job, seeks a writ of mandamus ordering compensation for his injury. The action is dismissed in its entirety for lack of subject matter jurisdiction, without prejudice and without costs.
  • Bellino v. Kinney 1986 September 15
    The plaintiff is barred from filing his claims under the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Billups v. Wesley-Jessen, Inc. 1986 September 22
    The defendants' motion for an appeal is denied.
  • Blackston v. United States 1986 February 18
    The plaintiff's motion to supplement the record is denied. The court orders, upon the plaintiff's application, that the United States shall pay the cost of transcripts to be ordered and furnished to the plaintiff in connection with his appeal to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit. The plaintiff's complaint is dismissed, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Bd. of Ed. of the E. Windsor Reg'l Sch. Dist. v. Diamond 1986 October 17
    The defendants' motion to modify an earlier court order is denied.
  • Bonney v. Hertz Sys. 1986 January 31
    Attorneys' fees and certain disbursements expended by the plaintiffs' counsel are awarded to the plaintiff and assessed against the defendants. A supplemental judgment is entered upon an accounting for Hertz' profits on certain car leases. In all other respects, the plaintiffs' application for awards of attorneys' fees, disbursements and other expenses is denied.
  • Bowes v. Dep't of the Navy 1986 January 24
    The plaintiff alleges that his federal statutory rights to employment as a handicapped person have been violated. Because the Secretary of the Navy is the only proper party defendant, but is not named in the complaint, the court grants the plaintiff an opportunity to file and serve an amended complaint.
  • Brevel Motors v. Vendo Co. 1986 November 03
    The case concerns the contractual status of terms stated in the defendant's purchse orders and in the plaintiff's acknowledgment of those purchase orders. The plaintiff's motion to dismiss the defendant's counterclaims is denied.
  • Brown v. Dietz 1986 July 29
    The plaintiff alleges that his civil rights have been violated because he is not eligible for parole until the end of his consecutive minimum sentences. The suit is found unsubstantial because of the plaintiff's failure to state a claim on which relief can be granted.
  • Cardozo v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1986 September 29
    The plaintiffs' cross motion to amend their complaint naming the United States as a defendant is denied due to its futility. The complaint is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Coleman v. Becton Dickinson & Co. 1986 September 19
    The defendant moves for the allowance of certain which the Clerk of the Court would not ordinarily tax as a matter of course. Some costs are allowed, but the allowance of expert witness fees is denied.
  • Condone v. Sec'y of the Army 1986 June 25
    The complaint against the federal defendants (Reagan and the Secretary of the Army) is dismissed because they are not charged with acting under color of state law. The plaintiff seeks injunctive relief but is denied it because he has no standing to sue on behalf of other prisoners nor, since he left Mid-State Correctional Facility, on his own behalf as a prisoner there. The plaintiff's claim for monetary damages is not dismissed.
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1986 March 03
    The defendants' request to reconsider a previous court order is granted. The order is vacated and the plaintiff's motion for summary judgment on certain counts of the second amended complaint is denied. An order by Magistrate Devine as it relates to the plaintiff's motion to preclude defendants from using certain documents in support of their antitrust claims is affirmed. The portion of Magistrate Devine's order relating to the production of personal financial records of Melvin Feiler is remanded to the Magistrate. The plaintiff's motion for leave to file a third amended complaint is carried pending receipt of an affidavit from the plaintiff's attorneys.
  • In re Corvelli 1986 December 03
    Reviews a bankruptcy court decision for errors of fact and of law. Affirms in part and reverses in part the order of the bankruptcy court.
  • Cox v. Hilton 1986 December 16
    The petitioner seeks a writ of habeas corpus. The petition is dismissed without evidentiary hearing.
  • Cummis v. RRI XX Mgmt. Corp. 1986 July 24
    Robert Chan is admitted pro hac vice, nunc pro tunc. The defendants' motions to dismiss or for summary judgment are denied. The defendants' motion to disqualify the plaintiffs' counsel is denied. The defendants' motion for counsel fees is denied.
  • Curry v. Tard 1986 July 08
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that his constitutional rights have been violated by prison officials' decision to place him in a management control unit after his attempt to escape. The plaintiff argues that by relying on the word of a confidential informant, prison officials denied him due process. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is denied. In correspondence, the plaintiff requests pro bono counsel, and clerks seek counsel to represent him.
  • Drayton v. Fauver 1986 September 24
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that the defendants have violated his constitutional right of access to the courts by restricting his use of the prison law library to 12 hours a week. The plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.
  • Dressler v. Plantier 1986 March 17
    The plaintiffs, two prisoners, claim that they have filed administrative complaints and legal actions against the defendants and that the defendants have retaliated. The court orders that the action will be dismissed if the plaintiffs do not file within 30 days an Amended Complaint in which their claims of violations of their civil rights are pleaded with the required particularity and specificity.
  • East Wind Indus. v. U.S. Dep't of the Treasury 1986 June 18
    The case relates to the bankruptcy of five related corporations, collectively referred to as "East Wind," which failed to transmit various withholding taxes to the IRS. The IRS chose to pursue the responsible officers or employees. East Wind filed an adversary complaint seeking to enjoin the IRS from attempting to assess or collect the 100% penalty against the individuals. This decision by United States District Judge Robert E. Cowen vacates an injunction issued by the Bankruptcy Court and remands the matter with instructions to dismiss the debtor's adversary complaint.
  • Ekins v. Kenworth Truck Co. 1986 October 16
    The defendants' motion to dismiss is denied. Purported service of process upon defendant Cook is quashed. Leave is granted to the plaintiff to file and serve an Amended Complaint.
  • Falter v. Veterans Admin. 1986 January 31
    The plaintiffs, patients at the Lyons Veterans Administration Medical Center, seek injunctive relief for certain violations of their constitutional rights which they allege arise from conditions at the hospital. While disapproving of some of the reported conditions and recommending some institutional changes, the court finds that the plaintiffs' complaints do not rise to the level of violating the patients' constitutional rights. Judgment is entered for the defendants dismissing the action, with prejudice and without costs. A letter from the United States Attorney for the District of New Jersey notes the precendental value of the opinion and urges its publication. Correspondence between Judge Bissell and Thomas Alder pertains to the publication of the opinion in the Military Law Reporter.
  • Farese v. Hicks 1986 January 09
    The plaintiff, an inmate at the Youth Correctional Institution, alleges that his prescribed medication was discontinued without doctor's orders. Affidavits from the medical staff treating the plaintiff assert that his his only medication was vitamins, and that they were available to him. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the action is dismissed, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Federal Inv. Corp. v. Reid 1986 September 22
    Creditor/appellant Federal Investment Corp. appeals an earlier order by the Bankruptcy Court awarding attorney's fees to debtor/appellee Reid's attorney. Federal Investment Corp. had garnished Reid's wife's salary even though Reid's Chapter 13 repayment plan depended upon his wife's income. The Bankruptcy Court ordered Federal Investment Corp. to turn over the garnished funds to Reid and to pay counsel fees to Reid's attorney. The appeal is dismissed and the order of the Bankruptcy Court is affirmed.
  • Freund v. Heckler 1986 September 29
    Plaintiff's motion for default judgment is denied. Plaintiff's motion to add the United States of America and the United States Department of Health and Human Services as party-defendants is granted. Other motions by the plaintiff and defendant are denied.
  • Garolis v. Tr. of the Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund 1986 June 16
    Denies the plaintiff's motion to amend his complaint.
  • Gendzwill v. Ziff-Davis Publ'g Co. 1986 February 28
    The plaintiff, who was absent from work for several weeks while suffering from lupus, claims that she was improperly dismissed by her employer, the defendant. The court finds no evidence that the defendant harbored any improper intent. The defendant's motion for summary judgment is granted.
  • Gen. Accident Ins. Co. v. Torres 1986 October 31
    The action arises from a motor vehicle accident in which the defendants were involved. Several of the defendants have filed conflicting claims against the plaintiff, an insurance company. In response to the Complaint for Interpleader, the court enjoins all defendants from seeking to enforce against the plaintiff any judgment obtained against Jose Luis Ramos. The plaintiff's motion to enjoin all further proceedings in three related cases is denied.
  • Gilmore v. State 1986 September 24
    The plaintiff, a prisoner awaiting eligibility for parole, challenges the constitutionality of New Jersey's law providing for mandatory minimum sentences. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied and the defendants' is granted.
  • Gonzalez v. Two or More Named Unknown U.S. Customs Serv. Employees 1986 March 24
    Denies motions by defendants Burnett and Goodknecht for dismissal of the action due to insufficiency of service of process and for summary judgment.
  • Grant v. Ewing 1986 February 10
    The plaintiff charges the defendant, a bail bondsman, with deception. The complaint is dismissed as frivolous because the plaintiff fails to present an arguable claim for relief under § 1983.
  • Grant v. Vitanzo 1986 February 10
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, seeks the return of a retainer paid to his attorney, but the allegations made by the plaintiff do not give rise to a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The action is dismissed as frivolous, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Gruen Indus. v. Gruen Elec. 1986 October 16
    The court accepts and adopts as its own the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Perretti. As sanctions for civil contempt, judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendants.
  • Haag v. Fauver 1986 June 18
    The consolidated complaints of several former prisoners against prison officials are dismissed on the grounds that the defendants have established their right to summary judgment and for failure of the plaintiffs, acting pro se, to prosecute their actions.
  • Harris v. Eisenberg, Honig & Fogler 1986 November 05
    The action arises from a fraudulent tax shelter recommended and provided to the plaintiffs by various of the defendants. Defendant Paritz's motion to dismiss certain counts of the complaint is denied.
  • Helbig v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1986 June 12
    Affirms the Letter Opinion and Order of Magistrate Haneke. Denies the request of the plaintiff, acting pro se, for a trial by jury.
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Wolf Creek Vill., Inc. 1986 November 19
    Grants the defendants' motion to amend their Counterclaim with additional counts.
  • Improta v. Weehawken Bd. of Ed. 1986 April 22
    Denies the plaintiff's motion for an Order granting collateral estoppel effect to the rulings of the state administrative agencies; for an Order recalling and vacating another judge's order which dismissed the plaintiff's procedural due process claims; and for an order recalling and vacating another judge's order dismissing certain of the defendants.
  • Int'l Ladies' Garment Workers' Union, Local 220 v. Solomon 1986 July 31
    The case concerns the sale of a home encumbered by debts.
  • J. I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1986 October 07
    The case arises from a contract for painting work. The plaintiff argues that it bid on a contract with the defendant based on expectations that were changed later on, resulting in more work needing to be performed. The defendant's motion to exclude evidence of the plaintiff's total cost of performing the work in question is denied. The defendant's motion to exclude certain correspondence and communications attributable to it and its personnel is granted in part and denied in part. The defendant's motion to exclude evidence of certain conversations and dealings between the parties which pre-date the execution of the written contracts is denied. The defendant's motion to quash subpoenas served on the project manager is granted.
  • Johnson v. Gregorio 1986 July 22
    The defendants' motion for dismissal is granted because the plaintiff's complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.
  • Johnson v. Monmouth County Bd. of Chosen Freeholders 1986 April 30
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, seeks a default judgment against all defendants and a preliminary injunction enjoining prison staff from interfering with his cell maintenance or medical treatment. The default against the defendants is vacated, and the plaintiff's application for a preliminary injunction is denied.
  • Jolley v. Tard 1986 April 04
    The complaint, by a prisoner whose personal possessions were lost when he was transferred from one cell block to another, is dismissed because it fails to state a claim under 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
  • Jones v. Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. 1986 January 15
    In an employment discrimination case, the defendant moves for reconsideration of the Court's prior decision suppressing from use at trial a certain deposition taken of the plaintiff. The reconsideration is granted, and it is ordered that the defendant not be precluded from using the deposition in question at trial.
  • Jones v. Smith 1986 May 06
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, asserts that his rights have been violated by a search of his cell and the seizure of a piece of contraband clothing. The defendants' motion for partial summary judgment insofar as it relates to the plaintiff's Fourth and Fourteenth Amendment rights is granted. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Kicklighter v. United States 1986 March 18
    The plaintiffs, who are members of the Religious Society of Friends, contend that their Constitutional rights have been violated by the imposition of a tax penalty after they underpaid their taxes in objection to the use of Federal money for military purposes. Because the complaint fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, the defendant's motion to dismiss is granted and the plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank 1986 October 31
    The Court responds to the parties' cross-appeals from an opinion and order issued by a magistrate regarding the scope of discovery relating to in personam jurisdiction.
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Business Sys., Inc. 1986 September 24
    The case arises from the transfer of the plaintiff's trade secrets and manufacturing know-how to the defendants, and the defendants' use of these trade secrets and know-how without compensation to the plaintiffs. Costs and attorneys' fees in a contempt matter are awarded to the plaintiff. Some of the attorneys' fees are reduced because the work performed appears to have been in excess of what was needed. In the main litigation, compensatory damages are awarded to the plaintiff but attorneys' fees and punitive damages are denied. The compensatory damages cover lost royalties, lost profits, and the diminution in value of the plaintiff's trademark.
  • Kurash v. Mountain Leisure Assoc. 1986 March 05
    Because the court lacks in personam jurisdiction over most of the defendants, it is ordered that the action, in toto, as to all claims and all parties, be transferred to the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania.
  • La Marca v. Travelers Ins. Co. 1986 October 28
    The plaintiffs claim that the defendant has committed a breach of fiduciary duty to them. The suit is found to be time-barred by the statute of limitations. The action is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
  • Laifer v. Twin County Grocers 1986 June 26
    The case arises from the termination of the plaintiff's employment by defendant Twin County Grocers. The plaintiff was deemed to have quit his job when he left the premises during his work shift. The plaintiff initiated a grievance with defendant Local Union No. 863 but was unsatisfied with the outcome. Summary judgment is granted to the union and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety as to the union. Partial summary judgment is granted to Twin County Grocers.
  • Lake v. United States 1986 September 18
    The case concerns a dispute over plaintiff Robert Lake's 1979 tax return. Lake says that he claimed a refund on that tax return; the IRS says that it never received the return in question and that the statute of limitations on claiming the refund has run out. Lake points out that his 1980 tax return, which the IRS did receive, reflects the overpayment claimed in the previous tax year. Because the plaintiff raises genuine issues of material fact concerning the adequacy and timeliness of his claim for a refund of taxes, the defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Lord v. Tard 1986 June 19
    [folder is missing]
  • Martino v. Metro. Transit Auth. 1986 June 20
    The plaintiffs are 21 individuals who agreed to pay defendant M.T.A. for a course in professional truck driving. The plaintiffs allege that the equipment and instruction they received was inadequate. The plaintiffs' motion to remand the action to the Superior Court of New Jersey is denied.
  • McGill v. Schiedemantel 1986 March 07
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that his constitutional rights were violated when he hit his head on a metal lock hasp in the prison and sustained an injury. Although the plaintiff may have been injured because of a lack of due care by prison officials, he does not advance a claim upon which relief may be granted under section 1983, and the suit is dismissed as frivolous.
  • McGilloway v. Berkshire Life Ins. Co. 1986 June 13
    The plaintiff seeks payment from the defendant, his insurer, for a total disability claim. The court finds faults with the plaintiff's claim, including the fact that he continued to work in his occupation during the period of claimed disability and the fact that he failed to notify the insurer of his disability until 23 months after its alleged onset. Judgment is entered for the defendant and the complaint is dismissed, with prejudice and with costs.
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1986 June 12
    The defendants are permitted to take de bene esse depositions of Japanese witnesses as a means of reducing the impact upon the defendants' ability to prepare for and defend the case which resulted from discovery delays perpetrated by the plaintiff and his counsel. The plaintiff appeals from Magistrate Devine's earlier order denying his motion to compel the defendants to provide more specific answers to interrogatories and to compel the defendants to produce certain documents. Magistrate Devine's order is not clearly erroneous or contrary to law and is therefore affirmed.
  • McNamara v. Brown 1986 April 18
    The plaintiff is a prisoner who claims that his civil rights have been violated by prison officials. The plaintiff's claims for denial of religious freedom and denial of contact visits are dismissed. The plaintiff's claims of overcrowding and lack of recreation are consolidated with another, class action suit by prisoners that is already in progress.
  • In re Menon 1986 February 19
    Affirms the Bankruptcy Court's order and dismisses an appeal by Jerome J. Londin, who seeks to the balance of an attorney's fee to which he is entitled.
  • Mentzel v. Fountain Motel 1986 February 06
    The plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment on the basis of collateral estoppel is denied. Certain defenses and counterclaims asserted by the defendant are barred under the doctrine of res judicata. The plaintiff's motion for parital summary adjudication is granted.
  • Mentzel v. Hollmann 1986 March 11
    The plaintiff claims that the defendant, owner of a motel, has breached two lease agreements for in-room steam baths and whirlpool baths. The defendant moves to dismiss the action for lack of in personam jurisdiction, lack of subject matter jurisdiction, insufficiency of service, and lack of venue. If the defendant's motion to dismiss is denied, he wishes the action to be transferred to the Western District of Wisconsin. The motion to dismiss is denied. The motion to transfer is also denied.
  • Miller v. Honda Motor Co. 1986 December 10
    The products liability case arises from an accident suffered by plaintiff Marion Miller while riding a Honda moped in Bermuda. The defendant's motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of in personam jurisdiction is granted, with costs.
  • Mirault v. Neubert 1986 June 30
    The petitioner, convicted of burglary and related crimes, seeks writs of habeas corpus in two separate actions. His petition is dismissed on the grounds that he has not exhausted his state remedies. The petitioner also moves to strike the respondents' answer because it was made in bad faith and was not timely. The motion is denied.
  • Mokone v. Maaga 1986 May 01
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that the defendants, his ex-wife and two prison officials, conspired to deny him his civil rights. Having been convicted of an assault on his ex-wife, the plaintiff mailed her harassing letters from prison and was subject to disciplinary action after she complained to prison officials. The plaintiff submits a motion to accept the allegations in the "unanswered" complaint as true. As to defendant Sapp, the plaintiff's motion is dismissed, without prejudice; and as to defendants Maaga and Reynolds, the plaintiff's motion is denied.
  • Molas v. Marine Eng'r Beneficial Ass'n Pension Trust 1986 October 23
    The plaintiff attempted to claim benefits from his deceased uncle's pension plan, but was denied because he was not a qualified beneficiary. The plaintiff's claims for detrimental reliance, unjust enrichment, and common-law fraud are all pre-empted by ERISA.
  • Molese v. Bergen County Prosecutor's Office 1986 July 31
    Proceedings in this federal civil rights action are stayed until final resolution of the plaintiff's appeals or applications for certification in the Courts of the State of New Jersey resulting from his state conviction.
  • Murphy v. Gen. Elec. Credit Corp. 1986 August 01
    Affirms a magistrate's decision not to extend the deadline for the plaintiff to produce an expert's report.
  • Narvaez v. Rodriguez 1986 November 05
    The defendant requests a stay of 180 days following the liquidation of the insurance firm providing him with representation. The request is denied because the defendant has already received two previous stays and because further delay of proceedings would be inappropriate.
  • Nasmith v. City of Newark 1986 November 03
    The plaintiff alleges that he was the victim of racially motivated police brutality. Because no defendant was served with process prior to the running of the statute of limitations, the defendants' motion to dismiss defendants Jones, Montanez, and Slade is granted.
  • Nat'l Amateur Roller Skating Ass'n v. U.S. Amateur Confederation of Roller Skating 1986 September 19
    The plaintiff and defendant are two different roller skating organizations which host events and competitions. The defendant's rules bar its members from participating in events organized by the plaintiff. The plaintiff argues that this restriction constitutes unfair competition. The defendant's motion for summary judgment on all counts of the complaint is granted.
  • National Indus. Group Pension Plan v. Gluntz Brass & Aluminum Foundry Co. 1986 September 24
    Because the defendants did not return the required acknowledgement form and have not thereafter been personally served, the plaintiffs' motion for default and default judgment is denied.
  • Newspaper Guild of N.Y. v. Middlesex County Publ'g Co. 1986 March 03
    Members of the plaintiff union seek severance benefits after their jobs are eliminated by the sale of the defendant corporation, their employer. The motion to dismiss the complaint is granted.
  • Nina Ricci v. FAP Imports, Inc. 1986 November 07
    The plaintiff, Nina Ricci, argues that its "L'air du Temps" perfume trademark is infringed upon by the defendant's perfumed talc "Air d'Amour" product. The draft is partial and does not include the resolution of the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction.
  • Nyberg v. Wood Indus. 1986 October 15
    The complaint is dismissed owing to the plaintiffs' failure to conduct the lawsuit in an acceptable fashion.
  • Oliver v. Prisciotta 1986 July 24
    The plaintiffs failed to secure a housing rental agreement for an apartment in the defendants' two-family home; the plaintiffs claim that the defendants discriminated against them because of their race. The plaintiffs' motion for a preliminary injunction is denied.
  • Oppenheim v. Hartford Ins. Group 1986 December 17
    The plaintiff's motion to remand the case to the state court is denied.
  • Panzitta v. United States 1986 August 14
    The case arises from the seizure of property by Revenue agents. The property was seized because the plaintiff's father failed to pay assessments, but the plaintiff alleges that the property belongs to him and not to his father. At the directive of the Court of Appeals, summary judgment is entered in favor of the defendant D. M. Carp dismissing certain counts of the complaint against him. Certain counts are dismissed and others are stayed.
  • Penna v. Rafferty 1986 June 25
    The plaintiff claims that his civil rights were violated by prison officials when they administered a urine test for drug use and held a hearing on the plaintiff's drug use violation without granting him his choice of counsel substitute from among the prison population. The complaint is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
  • Progressive Inv. Corp. v. Midland Ins. Co. 1986 May 28
    The case arises from a fire loss suffered by the plaintiffs, who were insured against fire by the defendant. The plaintiffs seek payment for the loss, which was denied by the defendant. The defendant seeks summary judgment, arguing that plaintiff Volpe failed to cooperate as required by the insurance policy and allegedly made a false swearing after the lawsuit commenced. Because the alleged false swearing does not void the insurance policy and because questions of fact exist as to the deliberateness of the plaintiff's non-cooperation, the motion for summary judgment is denied. The defendant's motion for stay is granted.
  • Quantum Prod. Serv. v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co. 1986 July 01
    The case arises from a joint project by the plaintiff and the defendants to explore and develop the landfill methane gas potential of a municipal landfill. After initial testing by the plaintiffs, the defendants wrote a letter to the municipality criticizing the plaintiff's testing methods and threatening to pull out of the project. The plaintiffs allege that the letter was defamatory, but summary judgment is granted to the defendants on the count of defamation, because the letter is found to consist of pure opinion. The defendants' motion to strike the plaintiff's claims for punitive damages and to declare that the parties were not joint venturers is denied. The defendants' motion for summary judgment on the claim of tortious interference with contract and interference with prospective business advantage is granted. The defendants' motion for summary judgment on the count of negligent misrepresentation is granted. The defendants' motion to limit the damages recoverable by the plaintiff to the damages specified in their letter of intent is granted. The defendants' motion to dismiss the count of common law unfair competition is denied. The defendants' motion to dismiss allegations of antitrust is granted in part and denied in part.
  • Ramco Am. Int'l v. Air Operations Int'l 1986 April 11
    The complaint is dismissed, without prejudice and without costs, for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
  • Robinson v. Edwards 1986 July 09
    The petition is dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Rothschild v. Rothschild 1986 June 03
    The case arises from the alleged kidnapping of a child, plaintiff Tiffany Rothschild, by her non-custodial parent subsequent to a divorce. The plaintiff's motion for leave to file a second amended complaint is granted. The plaintiff's § 1985 claims are dismissed because they fail to plead a discriminatory class-based animus. The Township of Ocean's motion to dismiss the § 1983 claims against it is denied. The § 1983 claims against defendant Furlong, a police officer, are dismissed. The complaint against defendant Pontecarvo, a police officer, is dismissed only to the extent that the § 1983 claims are based upon procedural due process. The § 1983 claims against defendant Kreizman, an attorney, are dismissed.
  • Schlobohm v. Wagner 1986 June 03
    The defendants' motion to vacate the entry of default and to extend the time to answer is granted.
  • Schwec v. United States 1986 April 29
    The plaintiff, proceeding pro se, seeks damages for "negligent and wrongful acts" by the defendants. The case arises from a varicocelectomy and hypospadias repair performed at a VA hospital in which the plaintiff was operated on by a substitute surgeon ("ghost surgery"), was circumcised without his consent, and obtained unsatisfactory results including loss of nerve sensation in parts of the penis. Defendant United States' motion to dismiss the plaintiff's claims against the Veterans Administration Hospital and the individual defendants is granted. The United States' motion for summary judgment is denied in all respects.
  • Shible v. United States 1986 February 13
    The plaintiffs' request for a preliminary injunction restraining the IRS from collecting taxes from them is denied. A letter from the editorial department of the West Publishing Company requests a copy of the opinion for inclusion in the Westlaw database. In a handwritten note, Judge Bissell grants permission for the opinion to be included in the database. A letter from Frederick T. Day at Prentice-Hall, Inc., concerns publication of the decision in American Federal Tax Reports. At the plaintiffs' request, an order is issued clarifying that the Court's ruling on a specific issue (regarding the IRS's sending of notices of deficiency) in the summary setting of a preliminary injunction application should not be considered conclusive and binding with regard to the plenary trial of all the issues in the case. Finally the complaint is dismissed in its entirety, with prejudice and without costs.
  • Shihadeh v. Tard 1986 January 09
    The defendant's motion for leave to file an answer out of time is granted. Because the plaintiff has not demonstrated a probability or likelihood of succes on the merits of his complaint at trial, his request for a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is denied.
  • Sigler v. D'Amico 1986 June 24
    The case arises from a prison altercation; the plaintiff, a prisoner, claims that the defendants, prison employees, violated his rights in the altercation. The defendants' motions for summary judgment are denied.
  • Smith v. Rafferty 1986 March 05
    The petitioner, a prisoner, is allowed to proceed in forma pauperis, but his petition for habeas corpus relief is denied.
  • State v. Thomas 1986 December 16
    The case arises out of a previous complaint in which the plaintiffs (the State of New Jersey and the New Jersey DEP) sought to require the Administrator of the EPA to adopt regulations for the assessment of damages to natural resources ("B regulations") as required under CERCLA. In this case, plaintiff intervenor Public Citizen Litigation Group moves to enforce a consent order under which the Secretary of the Interior was required to promulgate final B regulations by a specified date. The Secretary believes he has complied with the consent order by submitting the final B regulations to the Federal Register. In the final regulations, the Department of the Interior deleted a "special resources" exception contained in the proposed regulations, reserving that matter for further consideration and public comment. The plaintiff intervenor's position is that the "final" regulations are incomplete due to the pendency of the Department's decision on the "special resources" exception and therefore, the department has failed to comply with the consent order. Whereas the plaintiff intervenor expresses its dissatisfaction as arising out of the defendant's failure to act, its complaint is actually with the contents of the final B regulations. Since review of any regulation promulgated under CERCLA may be had only in the Circuit Court of Appeals of the United States for the District of Columbia, and since the Department of the Interior has complied with the consent order, the plaintiff intervenor's motion to enforce compliance is denied.
  • Supka v. Worldwide Yacht Charters 1986 February 18
    The plaintiffs seek, and are awarded, treble damages under the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act.
  • Taylor v. Wyeth Lab. 1986 April 09
    The case arises from the death of an infant, the plaintiffs' family member, two days after he received an immunization manufactured by one of the defendants. Because it is undisputed that the defendants were not served with the summons and complaint within the required 120 days after the filing of the complaint, and because the plaintiffs cannot show good cause for the delay, the action is dismissed.
  • Terrell v. Tard 1986 May 16
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that his constitutional rights were violated when prison officials confiscated from him two packages of cigarettes which they considered to be contraband. The defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted as to all claims.
  • Tiger Inn v. Edwards 1986 June 09
    [Copy of a decision by U.S.D.J. Robert E. Cowen that was sent to Judge Bissell for reasons not clear from the documents.]
  • Tilley v. Schering Corp. 1986 December 03
    The case concerns alleged unsafe working conditions and retaliatory discharge of the plaintiff by the defendant. The plaintiff's federal claims are dismissed because no private right of action exists for these claims. The plaintiff's state claims are dismissed without prejudice for several reasons, including the fact that the plaintiff seeks to recover under contract and tort actions newly created by the New Jersey Supreme Court. The defendant's motion for summary judgment of the federal claims is granted.
  • Twp. of Clinton v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1986 June 18
    [Copy of a decision by Chief Judge Fisher that was sent to Judge Bissell for reasons not clear from the documents.]
  • Twp. of Ocean v. Int'l Surplus Lines Ins. Co. 1986 June 09
    This complaint arises out of another case being handled by the same court, Rothschild v. Rothschild. Plaintiff Township of Ocean seeks to have its insurers, the defendants, compelled to provide liability insurance coverage for its employees, two police officers and an attorney involved in the Rothschild case. Summary judgment is granted to defendant Commercial Union. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment against defendant International Surplus is denied. The plaintiff's motion for summary judgment against defendant Atlanta is granted. Atlanta's cross-motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Trombetta v. Peil 1986 July 22
    Application by the New Jersey counsel for the plaintiffs to withdraw as local counsel is granted.
  • United States v. Escarda 1986 December 29
    The defendant seeks a motion to change his sentence for marijuana-related charges, claiming that an incorrect severity rating was attached to his crime at the time of sentencing. The motion is denied.
  • United States v. Febre 1986 June 18
    The defendant seeks vacation of his sentence and a writ of habeas corpus. The petition is denied.
  • United States v. Gallagher 1986 June 12
    Defendant Gallagher seeks an order directing the warden of a federal correctional facility in Arizona to allow him to visit with one of the inmates there. The motion is denied. After a mistrial is declared due to the jury's inability to reach a verdict, defendants Gallagher and Sharkey seek judgments of acquittal. Their motions are denied and a date is set for retrial. The matter is ultimately dismissed with prejudice.
  • United States v. Gambino 1986 November 12
    The defendant seeks a modification of his sentence to allow early parole. The motion is denied.
  • United States v. Liberto 1986 December 31
    The defendant seeks the correction or vacation of his allegedly illegal sentence. The motion is found to be groundless on its face and is denied.
  • United States v. Lindsley 1986 June 23
    The defendant seeks a new trial, but the motion is denied. The defendant alleges that two FBI agents destroyed documents that were sought by, and potentially helpful to, the defense. A hearing is scheduled to take testimony from the agents about the acts attributed to them.
  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1986 August 12
    Claimant Universe Affiliated International applies for an award of attorney's fees and expenses. A partial award is ordered. Appendices to the opinion specify hours disallowed and hours and fees allowed.
  • United States v. Thomas 1986 April 29
    In a letter, the defendant pleads for early parole, claiming that the prison medical facilities are inadequate to provide for his rehabilitation from certain injuries to his leg. The request is treated as a motion for reduction of sentence and is denied.
  • Varca v. Fauver 1986 June 03
    The plaintiffs, a group of State prisoners, allege that while they are incarcerated in the Ocean County Jail as part of a program to relieve overcrowding at the state prisons, they are not being accorded the benefits which they would receive if thye were housed in a State-run penal institution. The plaintiffs' claims based upon allegations that as State prisoners they should not be housed in a County penal facility are dismissed. The plaintiffs' claims relating to the specific conditions of their confinement are consolidated with another action. After being moved to another facility, plaintiff Varca moves for a temporary restraining order and/or preliminary injunction; for a protective order; and for the Court to either vacate or finalize a portion of its earlier order. All three motions are dismissed.
  • Vornado v. Tr. of the Retail Store Employees' Union, Local 1262 1986 December 03
    The plaintiffs' motion for reargument and reconsideration is denied.
  • Washington v. Hilton 1986 March 17
    The plaintiff's application to set aside the settlement reached in this matter was referred to Judge Devine, who filed a report and recommendation. The report and recommendation are adopted by the Court as its own Opinion in toto. Judgment is entered in favor of the plaintiff.
  • Weiss v. United States 1986 November 12
    The plaintiff, Joseph Weiss, alleges that he was injured when he slipped and fell on ice which had accumulated on the sidewalk in front of a United States Post Office. The plaintiff seeks compensation from the defendant United States of America and from defendants added in an amended complaint, Division Realty Company and its principal Fred Weiss. The case is referred to arbitration, where an award is determined, but the plaintiff requests a trial de novo on the grounds that he does not believe the arbitratoin award accurately and fairly represents the damages he suffered. Defendants Division Realty and Fred Weiss move for summary judgment, but the motion is denied. Defendants Division Realty and Fred Weiss also seek summary judgment as to the Government's cross-claims and third-party claims for indemnity and contribution. The motion is denied.
  • White v. Van Lieu 1986 April 18
    The plaintiff files a complaint for alleged violations of his civil rights during his imprisonment at the Mercer County Correctional Center. The defendants' motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, or in the alternative, for summary judgment, is denied.
  • Williams v. Collier 1986 March 10
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that his constitutional rights were violated by the denial of proper medical care to him while he was an inmate at the Essex County Correctional Center. The complaint is dismissed without prejudice and without costs. The plaintiff's motion for appointment of counsel is denied.
  • Young Life v. Young Life of Africa 1986 March 21
    Because the defendant's name is confusingly similar to the plaintiff's service mark, the plaintiff is granted summary judgment as to liability on one count of the complaint under the Lanham Act. The plaintiff's request for summary judgment on its other claims is denied.
  • Zamboni v. Stamler 1986 May 09
    The plaintiff asserts that he was harassed in his employment at the Union County Prosecutor's Office and that he was wrongfully suspended without pay in retaliation for his having filed suit earlier to challenge a proposed plan of reorganization of the Prosecutor's Office. Defendants Stamler and Rodbart are represented by separate counsel from the same law firm. The plaintiff's counsel requests that an alleged conflict of interest in the defendants' representation be resolved. Defendants Stamler and Rodbart move to declare the right of the Zazzali firm to continue its representation of both defendants. The joint representation is declared permissible and the defense counsel is directed to secure waivers from the defendants indicating that the propriety of representation of them will not be raised in any of their appeals.
  • Abate v. Monroe Sys. for Bus. 1987 June 30
    The plaintiff alleges that the defendants, his former employers, discriminated against him based on his age and created a hostile work environment. The plaintiff appeals an earlier order by a magistrate denying his motion to compel responses to certain interrogatories directed at his former supervisors. The magistrate's order is confirmed in all respects and the plaintiff's appeal is denied in full.
  • Admin. Office of the U.S. Courts 1987 December 18
    [memo]
  • Am. Centennial Ins. v. Underwriters, Inc. 1987 September 23
    In response to the plaintiff's interrogatories, the defendants provide a large quantity of business documents which may or may not contain the answers sought. Magistrate Haneke compels the defendants to file appropriate answers to the plaintiff's interrogatories. The defendants appeal to Judge Bissell. The magistrate's order is affirmed but the deadline for compliance with that order is extended.
  • Anastasio v. Schering Corp. 1987 February 18
    Specifies the fees and disbursements to be awarded to the plaintiff. Denies the defendant's request for a new trial on the issue of liability.
  • Anthony Petroleum v. Baii Banking Corp. 1987 June 22
    The defendant submitted a request for dismissal of the count that included a Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) claim. The plaintiff did not successfully prove that the defendant engaged in a pattern of racketeering activities, which is required to validate a RICO claim. The defendant's motion to dismiss the count comprised of the RICO claim is granted.
  • Artway v. Scheidemantel 1987 October 28
    This case concerns a prisoner who was ordered to pay restitution for damages he made in his cell at the Adult Diagnostic and Treatment Center. The prisoner alleges that he was not given the opportunity to dispute the amount of the restitution. Defendant's assertion that the suit is barred by res judicata and the Holding of Parratt v. Taylor is denied. The defendant's request for summary judgment regarding the plaintiff's claims that he was denied equal protection, a jury trial, and access to the court are granted. Summary judgment was entered against the defendant as it was found that the plaintiff was denied due process regarding determination of the amount of restitution.
  • Asken v. Thomas 1987 February 09
    The plaintiff, a letter carrier, alleges that the defendants, postmasters and supervisors, denied his right to continuation of pay and light duty status after he sustained an injury. This matter was dismissed at the outset as the plaintiff failed to exhaust grievance-arbitration procedures with the employer first.
  • Axelrod v. U.S. Judiciary 1987 May 26
    The plaintiff's complaint is dismissed as frivolous for failure to state a cognizable federal claim.
  • Baldwin v. Bonazzi 1987 December 22
    A prisoner alleges that he was denied a speedy trial and that his statutory rights under the Interstate Agreement on Detainers (IAD) were violated when he was transferred from a New York prison to a New Jersey prison. It was found that the plaintiff's guilty plea waived the IAD provisions. Due to the mere 49 day lapse in pre-trial proceedings, no evidence of a deliberate delay by prosecution, and the plaintiff's own contribution to the delay, the plaintiff's request for a writ of habeas corpus is denied.
  • Barbosa v. Harris 1987 February 13
    The plaintiff alleges that he was assaulted in a national park. The plaintiff filed a complaint against the Gateway National Recreation Area and its park rangers for failing to protect him from harm. The defendants' motion to dismiss is granted since individual park rangers are immune from suit and a federal agency cannot be sued in its own name.
  • Barry v. Brower 1987 August 14
    The petitioner seeks to have his appeal reinstated. The petitioner's writ of habeas corpus is granted, his appeal is reinstated, and he is permitted representation by the Public Defender.
  • Battle v. County of Union 1987 September 30
    Plaintiff alleges intentional wrongful arrest and false imprisonment and names the assistant prosecutor of Union County and the Township of Woodbridge as defendants. The false arrest of the plaintiff does not constitute a denial of due process. The counts against the prosecutor are dismissed. Summary judgment is granted in favor of the defendants since the officers were found to have acted reasonably and in good faith reliance on the arrest warrant .
  • Bench Comment (Publication of the Federal Judicial Center) 1987 December 01
    A newsletter called Bench Comment, which summarizes case law on post indictment restraining orders under the Comprehensive Forfeiture Act.
  • Blanks v. Heckler 1987 July 10
    The plaintiff requests review of the Secretary of Health and Human Services' decision to deny his request to reopen prior cessation of disability benefits and for denial of his second application for benefits. The defendant's request for dismissal is granted on the grounds that the court lacks subject matter jurisdiction.
  • In re Bob's E. Contracting 1987 January 15
    Debtors, after entering into a Settlement Agreement, submitted an affidavit stating that a truck they owned and identified previously as collateral had been destroyed in a fire. The truck was later found, the debtors were held in civil contempt of court, and were liable for damages to their creditors. Attached are Exhibit A, a transcript of the court proceedings, and Exhibit B, the debtor's certification of the truck lost due to fire.
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1987 September 30
    The plaintiff alleges that the police officers, the police department, prosecutors, and the county prosecutor's office acted negligently in the case of a victim of domestic violence who was then killed by the man she filed a complaint against. Summary judgment is granted to the prosecutor and the county prosecutor's office because they have immunity from liability when acting within prosecutorial jurisdiction. The officers' and the police department's motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim are denied. The police department's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's negligence claim is denied. The police department's motion to dismiss the plaintiff's first three causes of action is granted.
  • Cardoso v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1987 May 18
    The plaintiff's motion to vacate the dismissal of the complaint is denied.
  • Chambers v. Pub. Serv. Elec. & Gas Co. 1987 July 08
    The plaintiff alleges that he was wrongfully discharged and denied employment benefits. The defendant employer filed a removal petition fourteen months after the plaintiff's complaint. The defendant was required to file a removal petition within thirty days after receipt of the complaint. The defendant's Petition for Removal is not timely filed and is denied.
  • Ciaravino v. Dir. 1987 October 01
    This case concerns a plaintiff's attempts to recover under the National Flood Insurance Program following losses sustained after a flood. The plaintiff failed to submit a proof of loss form within 60 days. The plaintiff's claims were dismissed.
  • Cole v. Pathmark of Fairlawn 1987 October 30
    Plaintiff filed a complaint against her former employer after she was arrested for shoplifting in the store and her employment was subsequently terminated. The plaintiff alleges false imprisonment, lack of probable cause, breach of employment contract for termination without good cause, and that the security guard interfered with her business relationship with her employer. A few of the plaintiff's counts are dismissed and the plaintiff's state law claims are remanded to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.
  • Computran Sys. Corp. v. Inductotherm Indus. 1987 October 08
    Computran filed a complaint against Sonex's parent company, Inductotherm, for alleged copyright infringement, conversion and unfair competition. Sonex filed subsequent complaints against Computran. Inductotherm's request for summary judgment is granted because Inductotherm operates as a separate corporate entity from Sonex and had no knowledge of any copyright infringement. Some of the counts in Sonex's subsequent complaint against Computran are dismissed.
  • Conn. Gen. Life Ins. Co. v. E. Dental Ctr. of Ewing 1987 October 09
    An insurance company filed a complaint against a dental office for alleged fraud via the dental office's practice of waiving its patient's co-payments but not submitting claims to the insurance company that reflect the waiver. The defendant's motion for summary judgment is denied.
  • Cooper v. Tard 1987 October 09
    Muslim prisoners in a maximum security prison allege that their right to the free exercise of their religion was violated when they were not allowed to participate in group prayer. Due to the penal setting and in the interest of preventing security problems, the inmates' complaint is dismissed.
  • Cox v. Metro. Life Ins. Co. 1987 June 24
    The plaintiff filed a complaint against her deceased husband's employer and the insurance companies who administered the company's employee life insurance benefit policy. The plaintiff claims to be entitled to the benefits of her husband's life insurance policy. Since the plaintiff's husband died 46 days after being removed from employment and the insurance coverage does not extend beyond 31 days after termination of employment, the defendant's request for summary judgment is granted.
  • Davis v. Sec'y of Health and Human Serv. 1987 November 09
    The plaintiff was awarded disability insurance benefits and supplementary security income benefits. The plaintiff submitted an application for attorney's fees to either be paid out of the awarded benefits or by the United States. The plaintiff's application for the attorney's fees to be paid by the United States is granted.
  • Davis v. Rafferty 1987 September 16
    Two inmates allege their rights were violated when they were ordered to void a urine specimen without probable cause. The defendants' request to dismiss the complaint is granted because the plaintiffs were non-responsive to the defendants' counsel following the complaint and the plaintiffs took no action on the case for 18 months.
  • Deeks v. Lake 1987 September 21
    This is an interpleader action in which insurance renewal commissions owed to a debtor form an interpled fund. The debtor filed bankruptcy. The present action is administratively terminated pending the outcome of the debtor's bankruptcy proceedings.
  • Dunn v. New Jersey Transit Corp. 1987 November 13
    An ex-employee filed a complaint against his former employer alleging that his termination and conspiracy to terminate him without due process violated his rights. The defendants' motion to dismiss the case in its entirety is granted because the defendants are immune from suit for jurisdictional reasons.
  • Durrof v. Pike County Dev. Ctr. 1987 February 17
    A mentally handicapped adult and his mother allege that the center (and its employees) where he received care failed to supervise and provide services, intentionally inflicted harm, and breached their contract. Some of the defendants' motions to dismiss are denied.
  • Dutka v. Bello 1987 May 29
    The plaintiff sued employees of the Internal Revenue Service and the United States. The plaintiff's case is dismissed since federal employees act pursuant to their federal positions and suits may not be brought against persons acting under color of federal law. The United States' motion to dismiss is granted due to the plaintiff's failure to submit an administrative claim and for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • Euro Imp. v. Roth 1987 December 14
    The plaintiff alleges that despite being denied permission, the defendant reproduced portions of their catalogs. Motions for summary judgment for both the plaintiff and the defendant are granted in part and denied in part for some counts. And motions for summary judgments for other counts are adjourned until a later date.
  • Falter v. Veterans Admin. 1987 March 11
    Letter to the deputy clerk from the Assistant United States Attorney and the Assistant Deputy Public Advocate stating that they do not want exhibits returned and the documents may be disposed of.
  • Farlow v. Fed. Bureau of Investigation 1987 August 21
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, requests that certain documents in his FBI file be disclosed. The defendants petition to establish that entire documents were properly withheld and portions properly deleted according to exemptions of the Freedom of Information Act. The defendants' request for partial disclosure is granted.
  • Federowitz v. Goldman 1987 March 10
    Plaintiff, a prisoner, alleges that members of the parole board violated his rights. The defendants failed to serve their answer to the plaintiff's summons and complaint so default was entered against the defendants. The defendants' request to vacate the entry of default and extend the time to answer is granted due to the extensive volume of which caused their delay.
  • Fidelity Union Bank v. United States 1987 January 05
    A bank teller embezzled money by manipulating a depositor's tax payments. The bank's motion to deposit funds and no longer be liable for the payment of additional interest is granted. The government is found to have acted reasonably in mitigating its damages.
  • Figueroa v. Rafferty 1987 June 17
    The plaintiff applied to file his complaint in forma pauperis but was denied. The plaintiff alleged that his fourteenth amendment due process rights were violated when he was transferred from a minimal security "camp" to a maximum security prison following his refusal to submit to a urine sample. The defendants prevailed because wide-ranging deference is given to prison administrators to make judgments necessary to preserve internal order and maintain institutional security.
  • Football Generals, Inc. v. J. W. Duncan, Inc. 1987 November 18
    The plaintiff purchased a USFL football team, the New Jersey Generals, from the defendant and entered into a contract, an Asset Purchase Agreement, including a lump sum payments and yearly installments over the next six years, specifying that if the Generals "will be playing," then the plaintiff is responsible for making installment payments. The plaintiff did not make a required installment payment, and because the New Jersey Generals were considered a "viable" team and because a reasonable person could assume that they "will be playing," satisfying the condition precedent of the contract, the plaintiff was responsible for payment to the defendant.
  • Frankel v. Shearson Lehman Bros. 1987 October 30
    The plaintiff alleged that the defendant violates several sections of Security Acts, and argued that, pursuant to the conract between plaintiff and defendant, Securities Exchange issues could not be arbitrated. Because the ambiguous language of the contract in the case of arbitration tends to favor arbitration and because there is strong federal policy favoring arbitration, the issues between plaintiff and defendant were arbitratable. Defendant's motion to compel arbitration was granted.
  • Freund v. Bowen 1987 May 01
    The plaintiff alleged that he was denied income based on a change in the Social Security Act. Plaintiff moved for class certification to include all other employees who were denied income, but because plaintiff did not satisfy his burden of proving the numerosity requirement of Fed. R. Civ. P. 23, based on faulty statistical evidence, plaintiff's motion was denied.
  • Garolis v. Tr. of the Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund 1987 June 30
    The plaintiff alleged that he was denied retirement benefits under and moved to amend his complaint to include a request for extra-contractual, or punitive, damages under ERISA, and the defendants moved for summary judgment. Summary judgment was granted for the defendants and the plaintiff's request was denied. The plain language and legislative intent of ERISA does not allow individuals to seek punitive damages as "other equitable relief."
  • General Electric Co. v. Heis 1987 December 07
    The plaintiff sought a preliminary injunction under the Lanham Act against defendant for use of its trademark and service names, "General Electric" and "Hotpoint." Plaintiff's preliminary injunction was granted and none of defendant's defenses, including laches, prior use, and antitrust violation, were applicable.
  • Gleis v. Norman 1987 September 10
    Following her arrest for assault, plaintiff alleged claims of intentional infliction of emotional distress and false arrest. Based on the standard of "outrageous conduct" for the intentional infliction of emotional distress claim, and the standard of "good faith" for an arrest warrant for the false arrest claim, defendants were entitled to summary judgment.
  • Grace v. City of Newark 1987 May 13
    The plaintiff, an inmate, alleged numerous violations of his civil rights against the city of Newark, its police department, and several employees. Because plaintiff knew or had reason to know of the offenses by a certain date and failed to file a claim, the personal injury statute of limitations expired and plaintiff's claim was dismissed in its entirety.
  • Granados v. U.S. Immigration 1987 December 28
    The plaintiff, a Filipino national who served for the U.S. during World War II, applied for naturalization with the Immigration and Naturalization Service ("INS") based on sections 701 and 702 of the Nationality Act of 1940. INS denied his application for citizenship, but because courts may review INS decisions de novo and because the plaintiff was a "category 2" applicant under case law interpreting requests like plaintiff's, he was entitled to naturalization.
  • Gross v. Xerox Corp. 1987 March 06
    The plaintiff obtained papers belonging to Xerox, attempted to obtain a finder's fee from Xerox, and eventually was tried for extortion and acquitted. Plaintiff's current claim against Xerox employees and FBI agents of a violation of his civil rights and a breach of contract arose out of these prior actions. The defendants moved for summary judgment but were denied because plaintiff's case presented genuine issues of material fact. Although the court did not have in personam jurisdiction over the defendants, a change of venue to Western New York was permitted to allow plaintff's case to go forward.
  • Gruhin v. Insall 1987 June 25
    The plaintiff sued her doctor over an implant and attempted to gain in personam jurisdiction in New Jersey, but plaintiff's stream of commerce theory was unpersuasive. Plaintiff's claim was transferred to a New York venue, regardless of whether that transfer would time bar her claim based on the statute of limitations.
  • Haight v. Grund 1987 November 24
    The plaintiff sued defendants through the RICO Act based on an investment he made and brought the suit in New Jersey. The case was transferred to the Southern District of New York because, even though RICO cases allow for broader personal jurisdiction when justice requires it, the court did not have personal jurisdiction over any of the defendants and the Southern District of New York had personal jurisdiction over all of the defendants.
  • Hardy v. Maucelli & Parkwood Gardens Assoc. 1987 October 26
    The plaintiff was denied a rental apartment by defendants that was rented to a white "tester" with fewer qualifications. Plaintiff was permitted to submit an amended complaint alleging civil rights violations and praying for injunctive, compensatory, and punitive relief. The additional named plaintiff, the Fair Housing Council, was dropped from the suit with prejudice because of lack of standing to sue.
  • Helbig v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1987 January 29
    The plaintiff was discharged from employment and brought charges of common law wrongful discharge, prima facie tort, negligence, and outrage under New York and New Jersey law. The common law wrongful discharge and prima facie tort claims were dismissed, but defendants' motions for summary judgment on plaintiff's negligence and outrage claims were denied. Attached are Exhibit A, a Letter-Opinion, and Exhibit B, a transcript of the proceedings.
  • Henry v. Beyer 1987 December 28
    The plaintiff, an inmate, presented a petition for habeas corpus relief in which he alleged that his seventy-year prison term violated the eighth amendment. The defendants argued that plaintiff had not exhausted state remedies and that the eighth amendment was not violated. Plaintiff did exhaust state remedies, but because his sentence was proportionate to his crimes, his petition was denied.
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Wolf Creek Vill., Inc. 1987 May 05
    An attorney in the case filed a motion for leave to be relieved as counsel, but the petition was denied without prejudice because of the attorney's insufficient service upon all clients and uncertainties in bankruptcy petitions.
  • Huiswoud v. Cuozzo 1987 June 24
    The plaintiffs alleged racial discrimination and a violation of their civil rights against realtors. The defendants moved for summary judgment, but summary judgment was denied because all plaintiffs, include the directly injured plaintiff, as well as her fiancee and the Fair Housing Council, had standing to sue.
  • Int'l Paint Co. v. Myers Eng'g, Inc. 1987 August 14
    The plaintiffs filed several tort- and contract-based claims against defendant based on the purchase of a paint mixer. The plaintiffs submitted several requests for production of documents and things, which were denied by a magistrate. The plaintiffs appealed, and some of their requests were denied because the magistrate's ruling was not clearly erroneous and the plaintiff's requests were overbroad, while other requests were granted but limited or narrowed. The defendant's cross-motion for costs and attorneys' fees was denied.
  • Jackson v. United States 1987 July 27
    The plaintiffs submitted a petition to quash an IRS summons, which the defendant moved to dismiss because the plaintiff failed to state a claim upon which relief could be granted. The defendant's motion was granted and plaintiff's petition was dismissed.
  • Jodeco v. Hann 1987 December 04
    The plaintiff sued members of a municipal zoning board, planning board, and the mayor in their individual and official capacities who would not approve his development plan, which included the granting of a use variance. The defendants were granted partial summary judgment based on absolute and qualified immunity. The Mayor and PLanning Board were granted absolute immunity because their actions were legislative in nature, while the members of the zoning board were granted qualified immunity because their actions were administrative in nature.
  • Jones v. City of Paterson 1987 December 14
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, alleged that his imprisonment was unconstitutional and sought compensatory damages. Because the plaintiff had not exhausted state remedies before seeking a writ of habeus corpus, his constitutional claim was dismissed without prejudice, and because his damages claima rose from the same set of facts, that claim was dismissed without prejudice.
  • Karlen v. Tribune Cable Commc'n 1987 May 26
    The plaintiff sold defendant a cable company, and plaintiff sued defendant for a contractual breach and sought damages. The plaintiff was permitted to seek damages if he suffered actual loss, and was permitted to pursue a declaratory judgment for defendant's breach of the implied covenant of good faith, but plaintiff was not permitted to sue for defendant's anticipatory breach.
  • Karolis v. Beyers 1987 November 30
    The plaintiff, an inmate, provided evidence about a murder, gave testimony, was granted immunity, and entered witness protection. The plaintiff later left witness protection and was tried for his role in the crime he testified about. Because plaintiff's initial conversation with agents was not a custodial interrogation, he could not claim violations of his fifth and sixth amendment rights. Plaintiff's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed.
  • Kievit v. Rokeach 1987 October 29
    Plaintiff's complaint included sixteen counts against defendants related to investments and the sale of stocks and securities fraud. The defendant Tucker Anthony's motion for summary judgment was granted on all counts because the plaintiff's complaint did not state a claim upon which relief could be granted against him, including respondeat superior liability. Defendants PAW and Rokeach's motions to dismiss the RICO claims were denied without prejudice and the pendent state law claims against these defendants were not dismissed. The remaining defendants could not be held liable on respondeat superior theory, and these defendants were permitted to compel arbitration on the remaining counts. The plaintiffs were permitted to amend their complaints with regard to the still-existing causes of action to allow a decision of the case on the merits at a later date.
  • Kilbarr Corp. v. Amsterdam-Rotterdam Bank 1987 March 10
    Plaintiffs filed a motion, by leave of court, to file an amended complaint to gain in personam jurisdiction over Defendants by adding additional defendants, which was granted. The additional defendants filed a motion to dismiss based on lack of in personam jurisdiction in the transferee forum, but it is the decision of the transferee forum whether they have in personam jurisdiction over the defendants.
  • La Pollo v. Gen. Elec. Co. 1987 July 15
    The plaintiff sued a predecessor manufacturing corporation and a successor manufacturing corporation for product-related injuries sustained. The defendant moved for summary judgment on the strict products-liability claim and on the negligence claim, and the negligence claim was denied. The summary judgment motion for the strict liability claim was granted because when a predecessor corporation sells one of its products to a successor but continues to manufacture and distribute product lines and retains assets, the successor cannot be sued for a strict products-liability claim.
  • Lair v. Fauver 1987 May 29
    The plaintiff, a prisoner at a diagnostic treatment center, alleged due process and equal protection violations when he was not permitted to serve on a prison liason committee. Plaintiff's complaint was dismissed as frivolous because he had representation on the committee and his claims did not rise to the level of due process or equal protection violations.
  • Lantz v. Loral Packaging 1987 February 09
    The plaintiff sued defendant for age discrimination and defendant filed for summary judgment. Defendant's motion was granted because, although Plaintiff stated a claim upon which relief could be granted, Plaintiff's complaint was not timely filed and Plaintiff could not show an equitable reason for the statutory time limitations to be tolled.
  • Lynch v. Gore 1987 October 15
    Defendant's motion to dismiss in a diversity action was granted because its letter was considered privileged. Defendant's communication was privileged because Texas had substantial contacts and a strong governmental interest in the litigation, Texas law holds the communication as privileged, and a New Jersey court would be likely to find the same result.
  • MacKenzie v. City of Newark 1987 September 30
    Summary judgment is granted in the case of a plantiff who charged that he was injured while being arrested by the Newark Police Department. It was found that the city and police chief had no municipal or supervisory liability in this case under the theory of respondeat superior as there was no policy or affirmative act that contributed to his injuries.
  • Mallon v. Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. 1987 May 26
    The documents concern a request for a case's dismissal due to the plaintiff's failure to retain adequate counsel. It is ordered that the plaintiff's attorney must complete admission to the bar and retain another member of the bar as local counsel.
  • McCarty v. Am. Cyanamid Co. 1987 December 23
    Plaintiff appeals a magistrate's orders regarding discovery materials in an employment discriminiation case against American Cyanamid Co. It is decided that the plaintiff may request certain employment records up to five years prior to his termination, may request documents in a previous employment discrimination case that specifically mention him, and may not request personnel files of other employees unless specific relevance is shown.
  • McCutchen v. G.H. Realty Co. 1987 April 24
    After coming to a settlement with the defendant on a housing discrimination matter, the plaintiff sues to recover attorney fees, which the defendant avers are outside the terms of the settlement. It is ruled that such fees are reasonable and the plantiff is awarded the requested fees.
  • McIsaac v. Kanematsu-Gosho, Inc. 1987 March 13
    In considering a motion to compensate the defendant for attorney's fees in a case that had resulted in summary judgment, it is ruled that the plaintiff's former counsel must compensate the defendant for such fees as a sanction against the attorney's conduct.
  • McMahan v. Bowen 1987 June 29
    Plaintiff's request for reversal of a decision denying Social Security benefits is reversed and benefits dating from the last application are granted.
  • McManus v. Hous. Auth. of Englewood 1987 April 10
    In an employment discrimination suit, it is ordered that a motion for summary judgment be dismissed and that certain non-Constitution compliants be adjudicated by the New Jersey Office of Administrative Law.
  • Meadows v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1987 June 24
    Concerning a case against the US Postal Service, it is ruled that the plaintiff failed to effectively serve defendants according to Fed.R.Civ.P. 4(d)(4), and the case is dismissed.
  • Mele v. Bowen 1987 August 14
    A previous decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services is affirmed in the case of a woman claiming social security benefits after a stroke.
  • Metall-Chemie Handelgesell-Schaft m.b.H. & Co. v. Seacor 1987 March 17
    It is ordered that a counterclaim is partially dismissed and that a co-defendant may only join one count of a counterclaim in a lawsuit about failure to honor a business relationship between German and American corporations operating in the United States.
  • Miller v. Anscher 1987 June 25
    In a medical malpractice case against a hospital, it is found that appropriate jurisdiction belongs to state court and and the complaint is dismissed pursuant to the New Jersey Charitable Immunity Statute.
  • Miller v. U.S. Capital Corp. 1987 December 01
    In a case regarding a New Jersey condominium illegally marketed as a residential establishment when, in fact, it included commercial space, it is ruled that certain defendants who are out-of-state residents can not be tried in New Jersey state court as the court's jurisdiction does not extend to them, while other defendents requests for dismissal are rejected based on their involvement with the marketing of the property.
  • Miraglia v. D'Ilio 1987 August 13
    Summary judgment is granted in the case of an inmate whose pro se prosecution accused the defendants of violating his civil rights by transferring him to state prison.
  • Misiewicz v. Bowen 1987 November 06
    The documents concern an appeal on a rejected social security disability claim. It is found that the Administrative Law Judge's descision that the plaintiff is not disabled was correct, and the judgment is upheld.
  • Monon Corp. v. Centre Serv. 1987 December 23
    In a suit and countersuit that center on a company that manufacters trailers against the company that buys, sells, leases, services and repairs said trailers, it is ordered that the servicing company must pay for all trailers in its receipt minus warranty work. As to the counterclaim that faulty manufacturing resulted in a poor quality product, it is ordered that more study is needed before the amount of judgment against the manufacturer can be determined.
  • Mt. Everest Ski Shops v. Ski Barn, Inc. 1987 April 03
    Regarding an antitrust lawsuit between Vermont companies operating in New Jersey, it is determined that the United States District Court for the District of Vermont is the appropriate forum for the case.
  • Najafi v. Rosen 1987 April 27
    Regarding a case against a private practice physician who served with the military, it is ordered that the petition for removal to federal court be dismissed as the defendant was not acting "under color of his office or status" as a federal employee during the actions which form the basis of the suit.
  • Napier v. Philips, Appel & Walden 1987 July 06
    In a consolidated case of five individual plaintiffs against individuals and corporations who allegedly mismanaged investment accounts, it is ruled that certain motions to dismiss specific complaints are denied while others are granted, and arbitration can only be compeled in two complaints for claims that were not yet dismissed.
  • N.J. Dep't of Envtl. Prot. v. Gloucester Envtl. Serv. 1987 August 20
    The moving defendants request to join with the United States Environmental Protection Agency as a party. The moving defendants' motion is denied.
  • Newark Morning Ledger Co. v. Newspaper & Mail Deliverers Union 1987 February 13
    Summary judgment is granted in the case of a newspaper company that objected to its newspaper deliverers' union claim that an arbitration agreeement was not binding as it was not final in the eyes of the defendant union.
  • Olitsky v. Rafferty 1987 April 30
    Regarding a request from prisoners to claim unsanitary conditions as a violation of their constitutional rights and to proceed in forma pauperis for this case, it is found that the action is frivolous and thus dismissed.
  • Organon v. Int'l Union of Elec. Workers 1987 September 28
    Summary judgment is granted in the case of a company that sued a union for an arbitration judgment in an employment discrimination case. A request for sanctions against the plaintiff was rejected.
  • Orr v. Sterling Limousine Corp. 1987 December 18
    With a plaintiff suing for failure to pay on a promissory note in the sale of a limousine company, and a request of the plaintiff to amend the original complaint to include a malpractice complaint against his lawyer, who was also the purchaser of the company, it is ordered that the amendment may proceed, but summary judgment is ordered on a count assigning personal liability for the note to the defendant.
  • Patnode v. Horowitz 1987 September 21
    In a medical malpractice case that centers on a physician who used non-standard equipment to examine a child in a sexual assault case, it is decided that the hospital and physician did not have a "duty of care" to the plaintiff, the child's father and accused molester, and the defendants' motion for summary judgment is granted and the action dismissed.
  • Pecone v. United States 1987 February 18
    Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(1), a suit against various corporations and the United States for violating the constitutional rights of a nuclear testing grounds employee who allegedly died of exposure to radiation poisoning is dismissed due to lack of subject matter jurisdiction.
  • In re Period Design Homes 1987 April 30
    Creditors filed a motion to convert debtors' Chapter 11 bankruptcy to Chapter 7 bankruptcy following a settlement payment. and also appealed the Bankruptcy Court's denial of their motion to reconsider a claim. Both the motion and the appeal were denied because the Bankruptcy Court's findings were not clearly erroneous.
  • Perkins v. Fauver 1987 January 27
    The plaintiff, a prisoner, claims his constitutional rights were violated by being kept in a holding area for 20 days before being assigned to a specific prison, and requests appointment of counsel. The complaint is judged inadequate and the defendants' request for summary judgment is granted.
  • Perretti v. Serraino 1987 June 10
    Summary judgment is granted for the defendant in the case of a plaintiff who claims his unemployment compensation was unfairly reduced by the New Jersey Department of Labor.
  • Policemen's Benevolent Ass'n of N.J. v. Twp. of Washington 1987 October 08
    When the mayor of a New Jersey town requires that all municipal employees undergo both random and annual drug testing, the Policemen's Union sues on the basis that such an action constitutes unreasonable search under constitutional law. It is ruled that individual testing is only warranted when there exists reasonable suspicion of drug abuse, and widespread testing is prohibited.
  • Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. v. U.S. Gypsum, Inc. 1987 March 28
    In an action regarding asbestos-laden material fraudulently advertised as being safe, it is decided that such a case reasonably qualifies as civil RICO violation.
  • Quantum Prod. Serv. v. Pub. Serv. Gas & Electric Co. 1987 May 28
    A motion to amend a complaint by reclassifying the plantiffs as individuals (rather than a corporation) is rejected due to the age of the original complaint and seeming lack of newly discovered evidence.
  • Rabil-Alamin v. Passaic County Tech. & Vocational High Sch. 1987 September 29
    Attorney's fees are awarded to a plaintiff who successfully sued his employer for race discrimination.
  • Ragland v. Tard 1987 June 110
    Defendants' request for summary judgment is granted in the failure to provide medical aid allegation of lawsuit of a prisoner who alleges he was mistreated. Summary judgment is denied on the complaints of abuse and inappropriate detention.
  • Randolph v. Brown 1987 March 03
    Following criminal prosecution in an assault an battery case, it is ruled that in civil proceedings the defendant may not introduce testimony from the plaintiff's attorneys or introduce into evidence a particular letter, and the plaintiff may introduce into evidence the defendant's conviction.
  • Redding v. Dietz 1987 June 10
    In the case of a prisoner who claimed his constitutional rights were violated when his parole hearing was repeatedly delayed, it is ruled that the delays were reasonable for purposes of obtaining pertinent records and the action is dismissed.
  • Schaefer v. Bateman Eichler Hill Richards, Inc. 1987 February 09
    Regarding a brokerage firm charged with mismanaging a couple's money, it is determined that New Jersey is an appropriate site for the require arbitration hearings and that plaintiffs may choose an arbitration entity within five days of the order allowing them to do so.
  • Sebastian Int'l v. Consumer Contacts 1987 June 30
    This case concerns gray market goods and what protection the Copyright Act provides against their unauthorized importation. The defendants are enjoined from distributing, selling, consigning or otherwise disposing of the plaintiff's products under certain trade names. The defendant is free to dispose of plaintiff's other products.
  • Sellers v. Johnson 1987 October 14
    The plaintiff was wrongfully arrested. Some of the defendants' motions to dismiss on the basis of qualified immunity are granted. One officer's motion for dismissal is denied.
  • Shields v. Murphy 1987 August 04
    Class action on behalf of shareholders which arose out of the alleged misconduct of a resort's Board of Directors in response to offers seeking to purchase Class B shares of resorts. The plaintiffs and defendants agree that the action became moot once Trump agreed to buy the Class B shares. Motions for sanctions and attorneys fees are reserved until an evidentiary hearing is held.
  • Smith v. Englehardt 1987 August 14
    An inmate was told that he needed an operation to remove a kidney stone. He filed a complaint because he had not received the operation. The inmate was permitted to proceed without prepayment of fees. The inmate's complaint was dismissed as frivolous.
  • Smith v. U.S. Sav. & Loan Ass'n 1987 October 16
    A debtor attempts to appeal an earlier order by the bankruptcy court denying confirmation and dismissing her Chapter 13 petition. Her appeal is denied and the bankruptcy court's decision is affirmed.
  • State v. Thomas 1987 October 13
    The plaintiff is awarded attorney's fees. A copy of the Deputy Attorney General of New Jersey's affidavit is attached.
  • Taylor v. State 1987 April 16
    The plaintiff alleges that his termination by his employer violated his constitutional rights. All claims against some of the defendants are dismissed. The plaintiff's claims for equitable relief against one defendant are dismissed.
  • Teltser v. Czin 1987 August 17
    The plaintiffs allege that a broker and investment company violated federal and state securities laws and state common law in connection with the management of a joint securities account. Some of the defendants' motions to dismiss certain counts are granted and some of their motions to dismiss counts are denied. The defendants' motion to compel arbitration is denied.
  • Temco Home Health Care Prod. v. Everest & Jennings 1987 November 12
    The defendant company is incorporated in California but has a regular and established place of business in New Jersey where the plaintiff filed a patent infringement complaint against them. The defendant's motion to transfer the action to California is denied.
  • Thomas v. Meese 1987 May 27
    A prisoner disputes the duration of his prison confinement. The claim is dismissed as frivolous.
  • Thomas v. State 1987 February 26
    A prisoner claims that he was falsely arrested for a stolen automobile. The prisoner's claim is dismissed as frivolous. A prisoner made conclusory statements alleging a violation of his constitutional rights. His claim was dismissed as frivolous.
  • Berkner v. Epstein 1988 January 22
    Plaintiff sued Defendant for breach of a share purchase agreement. Plaintiff moved for summary judgment based on Defendant's default, but the motion was denied because Defendant was no longer in default. Plaintff's second motion for partial summary judgment was denied because there was no proper notice of default as required by the original Share Agreement. Plaintiff filed a motion to have the second denial of summary judgment reconsidered, but the motion was denied.
  • Berson v. Alexander & Alexander, Inc. 1988 May 09
    Plaintiffs, owners of commercial premises, sued Defendant, an insurance broker, after Plaintiffs suffered a total loss. Defendant owed a very broad standard of care as an insurer, but Defendant acted prudently. Because Plaintiff also failed to prove that Defendant's actions were the proximate cause of Plaintiff's loss, judgment was entered in favor of Defendant and Plaintiff's case was dismissed with prejudice.
  • Blum v. Wico Chem. Corp. 1988 December 27
    In civil rights cases, attorney's fees can be increased based on a fifty percent multiplier if certain conditions are present, and there is a marked difference between enhancement for delay, which cannot be subject to a multiplier, and enhancement for risk, which may be subject to a multiplier.
  • Brito v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    Defendants filed a motion to have the case dismissed due to a lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the Eleventh Amendment claim can be brought in state or federal court, and the statute of limitations would be tolled during any pendency, Defendant's motion was dismissed.
  • Broski v. Pennsylvania 1988 January 15
    Defendants filed motions to have Plaintiff's complaint dismissed based on Eleventh Amendment sovereign immunity and for lack of in personam, or personal, jurisdiction. Certain Defendants' motions were granted because they had immunity from suit as cities or municipalities, but on the remaining causes of action where the court lacked personal jurisdiction, the case could be transferred to another venue.
  • Brown v. Grabowski 1988 January 06
    Defendants filed a motion for reconsideration of a qualified immunity defense, which was denied. Plaintiffs also filed a motion for reconsideration of a denial of summary judgment, which was denied.
  • Brown v. Neubert 1988 August 29
    Plaintiff, an inmate, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that his plea agreement was involuntary due to an insufficient factual basis and due to ineffective assistance of counsel. Because Plaintiff indicated that he understood his plea agreement and its consequences, and because Plaintiff's counsel's assistance did not fall below the standard of "reasonably competent attorney," Plaintiff's petition was dismissed.
  • Bryant v. Bowen 1988 March 03
    Plaintiff filed for reconsideration of her claim, denied by an ALJ, that she was entitled to Supplemental Security Income ("SSI") benefits and to Disabled Widow's Insurance Benefits. Because the ALJ's findings were supported by substantial evidence that Plaintiff's condition was not a sufficient disability, Plaintiff's motion for reconsideration was dismissed.
  • Chemisphere Tech. Corp. v. Metalx 1988 July 28
    Plaintiff brought several federal and state claims, including claims under the Sherman Act and the Robinson-Patman Act. Among these many complaints, Plaintiff alleged that Defendant created a vertical price fixing conspiracy with regard to a chemical nickel stripper in which Plaintiffs' involvement was coerced. Plaintiff's involvement included distribution, marketing, and advertising. Defendant's motion for summary judgment on claims relating to this particular allegation of Plaintiff's were granted, although other motions for summary judgment were denied.
  • China Ocean Shipping Co. v. Maher Terminals 1988 January 20
    Plaintiff, a Chinese corporation thatowns and operates boats contracted with Defendant to provide services related to one of the boats. Plaintiff alleged that Defendant breached their agreement in several ways and moved to amend their original complaint. Plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint was granted for breach of contract for agreed amount, breach of contract for reasonable amount, fraudulent non-disclosure, and economic duress. Plaintiff's motion to amend was denied for conversion and intentional interference with contractual relations and prospective economic advantage.
  • Christopher v. Gabriel 1988 November 30
    Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant for fraudulent misrepresentation related to the sale of Boardwalk property for less than fair market value. Defendant moved for partial summary judgment, which was granted because Plaintiff's conducted affirmed the disputed contract, the statute of limitations for fraud had expired, and the doctrine of laches prevented Plaintiff's cause of action.
  • Clayton v. Beyer 1988 May 25
    Plaintiff, an inmate, filed a petition for a writ of habeas corpus, claiming that his plea bargain was a violation of the sixth and fourteenth amendments because the plea bargain was entered after an accusation, not an indictment. A plea bargain is only appropriately brought by an accusation when a crime is not punishable by death because crimes punishable by death must be brought by an indictment. Because the death penalty was no longer in force when Plaintiff entered into the plea bargain, it was appropriately brought by an accusation. Plaintiff's petition for a writ of habeas corpus was dismissed.
  • Clemons v. Fauver 1988 May 18
    Plaintiff, an inmate, claimed that his fourth, eighth, and fourteenth amendment rights were violated when he was held in a condemned cell with inoperable fixtures and when he was given no notice that a urine specimen showed positive for opiates. Because Plaintiff's isolation conditions were de minimus, they did not rise to the level of an eighth amendment violation, because the fourth and fourteenth amendments were not violated because no notice was required under prison policy, and because the eleventh amendment barred suits against Defendants who were state officials sued in their official capacities, summary judgment was granted for all Defendants and Plaintiff's claim was dismissed with prejudice.
  • Crest Audio v. Dunlop Mfg. 1988 July 20
    Plaintiff alleged several claims related to trademark infringement, including claims under the Lanham Act, for Defendant's use of a particular music distortion device. Because Defendant was capitalizing on Plaintiff's goodwill and longer-term associations with the product name, Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction was granted in part, but because it was unclear whether trade dress infringement had occurred without the Defendant's specific use of the name "fuzzface," Plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction was denied in part.
  • Crowell v. Menchin 1988 July 27
    Plaintiff, an inmate, sued Defendants, public defenders, under § 1983 for discontinuing Plaintiff's motions for a change in sentence. Defendants' motion for dismissal was granted because public defenders are not acting under color of state law when they are acting within the normal scope of defending a client, and thus they are not subject to a § 1983 claim.
  • Davis v. Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. 1988 July 21
    Plaintiff's estate sued the Defendant insurance companies for a denial of benefits and for negligence in its failure to provide notice about requirements that were necessary to administer the policy. Defendant was denied summary judgment on the first count because the court could not determine whether Defendant's denial was arbitrary and capricious, but Defendant was granted summary judgment on the second count because Defendant did not breach a duty to provide information.
  • Demby v. N.J. Dep't of Corr. 1988 June 20
    Regarding an employment discrimination lawsuit brought by a corrections officer who was fired after testing positive for drug use, it is decided that proceedings should continue at the state court level and all declaratory relief sought by the plaintiff is stayed.
  • Des Moines '81 Assoc. v. F.W. Woolworth & Co. 1988 July 21
    Summary judgment is entered in the defendants' favor in a suit regarding a corporation that vacated a leased property and then sublet the storefront to other tenants. The plaintiff had sued for various costs related to the property and requested a portion of the new tenants' profits, according to the terms of the lease with the original tenant.
  • Duffy v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    The recommendation of United States magistrate to dismiss a case for lack of subject matter jurisdiction is affirmed.
  • Dynatron/Bondo Corp. v. Clausen Co. 1988 September 22
    In a patent dispute about a putty dispenser in which the defendant company then declared bankruptcy, it is ordered that the magistrate's order is upheld and the defendant must submit a responsive brief to the bankruptcy appeal. In the second opinion, the bankruptcy court's granting of summary judgment to the defendant is affirmed, despite the plaintiff's claim that new evidence was found and ignored by the bankruptcy court.
  • In re Elsinore Shore Assoc. 1988 February 03
    Appellants wish to appeal a disclosure statement that is a part of a bankruptcy proceeding. Their application for appeal is denied.
  • Enprotech Corp. v. Renda 1988 February 12
    The orders concern a defendant who is accused of stealing proprietary information from his employer and then forming a new corporation with his co-defendants to sell a particular product while illegally taking advantage of his prior relationship with his employer. Claims for abuse of process, interference and malicious prosecution are dismissed, while the motion to dismiss all claims against the Japanese parent corporation are dismissed for lack of in personam jurisdiction.
  • Essex Chem. Corp. v. Gruit-Heberlein AG 1988 June 24
    Preliminary injunctive relief is granted to an American corporation that sued a Swiss company that allegedly used a joint venture agreement to obtain and then illegally distribute nonpublic information in order to prepare for a hostile takeover.
  • Federowicz v. Goldman 1988 October 11
    Regarding a prisoner who sued a parole board for various constitutional violations, it is ruled that parole boards are immune to prosecution when conducting their duties and that the remainder of the plantiff's claims must be reviewed in state court.
  • Filter Equip. Co. v. Membrana Corp. 1988 January 22
    In the case of a distributor suing three companies with a chain of ownership over products the distributor later tried to return goods according to a disputed agreement for returned goods, summary judgment is granted on two counts, whereas a breach of contract complaint is allowed to proceed.
  • Food Fresh, Inc. v. Stay Fresh, Ltd. 1988 May 31
    A request for dismissal of a breach of contract claim in granted in the case of a distributorship dispute between a British and American companies. Motion to dismiss for lack of in personam jurisdiction and for unjust enrichment are denied.
  • Football Generals, Inc. v. J.W. Duncan, Inc. 1988 October 14
    In a dispute over payments on a football team that was part of a league that later went out of business, it is decided that the defendant's request for payments beyond the date the team was viable is denied, regardless of whether the plaintiff breached the contract with an earlier nonpayment. Defendant is also awarded appropriate attorney's fees related to suit on a specific payment, though not for fees related to future payments.
  • Franchise Stores Realty Corp. v. Ross 1988 January 28
    Regarding a Carvel Ice Cream franchise with the right of first refusal on the purchase of property adjacent to its leased space, it is decided that the plaintiff did not respond to the right of refusal notice in a timely manner and the defendants' request for summary judgment is granted.
  • Frankel v. Shearson Lehman Bros., Inc. 1988 December 08
    Regarding securities fraud arbitration, it is decided that the details of the case do not constitute manifest disregard of the law on the part of the arbitration board, and that board's decision is let to stand.
  • Gadson v. Baer 1988 August 09
    A prisoner's request for a writ of habeus corpus is rejected when it is found that the state in which he has filed the lawsuit has no juridisiction over the case.
  • Geeter v. Marsh 1988 January 06
    A racial discrimination employment lawsuit against the U.S. Army is barred by the statute of limitations having expired.
  • Gen. Biscuit Brands v. R.K.D. Oil Co. 1988 May 23
    A case to try certain New Jersey fuel providers with racketeering is allowed to proceed, despite the defendants' claim that the alleged fraud does not fall under RICO standards.
  • Gen. Elec. Co. v. Heis 1988 September 14
    Summary judgment is granted in a trademark case against a small business specializing in refrigerator repair.
  • Gomez v. Iberia Airlines of Spain 1988 March 17
    Considering a motion for partial summary judgment against a plaintiff who sued an airline and travel agency after her luggage was lost, such a judgment is granted limiting the defendant's maximum exposure to liability to $840.
  • Granados v. U.S. Immigration 1988 November 30
    An earlier order to naturalize a citizen of the Phillipines is vacated and naturalization is denied.
  • Green v. Bowen 1988 April 11
    A decision by the Secretary of Health and Human Services to demand repayment on overpaid social security benefits is affirmed.
  • Groel v. L.F. Rothschild & Co. 1988 June 28
    In a securities fraud case, the defendant requests the trial be moved from New Jersey to New York. Final decision is unknown due to missing documents.
  • Gulf & W. Mfg. Co. v. United Steelworkers of Am. 1988 February 09
    Concerning an arbitration award for pension and severance pay to employees whose plant was sold, the arbitrator's award of pension benefits is affirmed and ordered paid with interest.
  • Gussin Gen. P'ship v. Sabarese 1988 December 08
    Regarding a request for an extension on an appeal that lapsed because the defendant's attorney neglected to file a notice of appeal in a timely manner, such an extension is approved for good cause.
  • Guzman v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Harden v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Hardy v. Maucelli 1988 September 13
    Judgment is ordered for the defendant in a case in which the plaintiff claimed he was rejected from leasing an apartment in a complex because of racial discrimination.
  • Harris v. Commc'n Techniques, Inc. 1988 December 30
    In a sexual discrimination complaint against an employer who allegedly denied promotions to female employees, the defendant wins partial summary judgment on one count and is rejected on the remaining counts.
  • Heaton v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Hellring Lindeman Goldstein Siegal Stern & Greenberg v. Skulsky 1988 February 29
    The plaintiff, a law firm, wins summary judgment when suing the defendant for failure to pay for legal services supplied during the defandant's mail fraud trial. Defendant had claimed attorney malpractice in refusing to pay the bill charging that the attorney had not noticed him of plea deals.
  • Holloway v. U.S. Postal Serv. 1988 January 20
    Regarding the defendant's request to dismiss the complaint of the plantiff against his employer, the U.S. Postal Service, for employment discrimination, it is found that the plaintiff failed to timely file his complaint or name a proper party defendant, so dismissal is granted.
  • Horowitz Fin. Corp. v. Ingersoll & Bloch Chartered 1988 September 22
    In a real estate deal gone sour, it is found that the defendant, a law firm, was not alleged to have offered advice knowing that said advice was false, or with reckless disregard to the veracity of the advice, and thus a claim for tortious interference can not stand and the case is dismissed.
  • Hudak v. Unisonic Prod. Corp. 1988 April 07
    A terminated executive filed a claim for an unpaid bonus and some unpaid or unreimbursed expenses. The defendant filed a counterclaim to recoup the salary paid to the defendant because the plaintiff's performance was allegedly so deficient that his performance breached their contract. Judgment is entered against the defendant and the plaintiff received severance and some reimbursement for expenses.
  • Improta v. Weehawken Bd. of Ed. 1988 October 18
    This case concerns a teacher who received a settlement to cover back pay and expenses incurred when the board of education placed him on an unpaid, sick leave and did not reinstate him. The teacher seeks attorneys' fees. The plaintiff is found to be a prevailing party and is entitled to attorneys' fees.
  • Ins. Co. of N. Am. v. Hop-On Int'l Corp. 1988 September 30
    A defendant/third-party plaintiff filed for reconsideration of an order dismissing the third-party complaint for failure to state a claim. The motion for reconsideration is granted in part and denied in part.
  • Int'l Union v. Curtiss-Wright Corp. 1988 October 25
    A corporation terminated its retiree benefit plan and seeks summary judgment and dismissal of class action and reconsideration of an earlier denial of its motion to strike the plaintiff's jury demand. All motions are denied.
  • J.I. Hass Co. v. Gilbane Bldg. Co. 1988 May 25
    A contractor is awarded pre-judgment interest and taxable costs following a jury verdict in its favor in a suit for recovery for the reasonable value of work performed.
  • Jersey Cent. Power & Light Co. v. Int'l Union of Operating Eng'r 1988 July 29
    This case concerns a jurisdictional dispute between unions and employers at a nuclear generating station.
  • Netelkos v. Weinberg 1988 May 20
    The plaintiff, in prison for multiple acts of securities fraud, alleged the defendants took part in fraud, misrepresentation and mismanagement of funds related to the liquidation of the brokerage firm in relation to which the plantiff had been charged with fraud. It is decided that the defendants are immune from liability as a matter of law.
  • Peaceman v. S.B. Thomas, Inc. 1988 January 06
    In an age discrimination case against an employer, it is ruled that such claims are unsubstantiated and therefore summary judgment is granted.
  • Poole v. Stephens 1988 May 16
    In the case of correction officers and their union bringing suit against a prison which required them to submit to drug testing, a preliminary injunction requested by the plaintiffs is denied and the plaintiff's action is stayed.
  • Porter v. ITT Corp. 1988 April 04
    Reviewing claims and counterclaims in a sexual harrassment lawsuit against the plaintiff's employer, it is ruled that a common law assault claim may proceed in New Jersey Superior Court and that remaining claims for punitive damages and a jury trial are dismissed. Claims with federal jurisdication are dismissed and the remaining claims are referred to be adjudicated by state court.
  • Provident Sav. Bank v. Aspen Impressions, Inc. 1988 September 28
    A plaintiff's request for summary judgment is granted in the case of a default on a lease agreement and an unconditional guarantee related to that agreement.
  • Reliance Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. CNA 1988 May 23
    In the matter of a savings and loan organization suing its insurance company to cover a liability policy that covered its former director, summary judgment is declared on behalf of the plaintiff and the defendant is ordered to pay out the $1 million policy.
  • Rosen v. Union of Am. Hebrew Congregation 1988 November 30
    In the matter of a lawsuit against a camp and its owners for negligence in regard to an injured child, it is ordered that the owners may not seek protection under New Jersey's Charitable Immunity Act as the laws of Pennsylvania, where the camp is based, should apply.
  • Roxas v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • RPM Dev. Corp. v. City of Orange Twp. 1988 December 08
    In the matter of a real estate development corporation suing two municipalities that did not use its services to develop low-income housing, a preliminary judgment to block one town from forging an agreement with another developer is denied and all claims against that town are dismissed.
  • Seamon v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Sec. Investor Protection Corp. v. Christian-Paine & Co. 1988 September 23
    The motion of a trustee of a liquidation account to release funds from an escrow account is denied, as is a motion to dismiss the claim of a couple who wishes to recover funds from the escrow account that allegedly were illegally diverted from a loan.
  • Sellers v. Marcik 1988 March 29
    Summary judgment is granted to the defendants' in a case in which a white man, mistakenly arrested for a crime committed by a black man with the same name, later sued various people involved in his arrest with violating his fourteenth amendment rights. It is ruled that the defendants were not guilty because they did not purposefully violate his rights.
  • Skandia Ins. Co. v. McDonnell Douglas Helicopters 1988 December 21
    Summary judgment is granted and the plaintiff's claims are dismissed in entirety and with prejudice in the matter of an insurance company suing a helicopter manufacturer for insurance coverage relating to an allegedly defective part that caused a crash.
  • Spiegel v. State 1988 September 14
    A claim for civil rights violation of a prisoner is dismissed when it is found that the statute of limitations has expired.
  • Stigliano v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Stocker v. N.J. Transit Rail Operations 1988 April 06
    In a challenge to a magistrate's order that a case against the New Jersey Transit Rail Operations be dismissed for lack of subject matter jurisidiction, the magistrate's order is affirmed.
  • Student Pub. Interest Research Group of N.J. v. Am. Cyanamid Co. 1988 July 21
    In a pollution-related complaint against a chemical company, it is decided that violations related to an expired permit are dismissed.
  • Sussex Drug Prod. Co. v. Kanasco 1988 March 16
    In a case about adulterated veterinary medicine, it is ruled that the sales transaction violated both express and implied warranties of merchantability. Summary judgment is grated to the plaintiff as to the defendants' liability for breaches of contract and warranties.
  • Tillman v. State 1988 March 03
    It is ruled that a prisoner's lawsuit for monetary damages and release from prison for a civil rights claim past the statute of limitations is frivolous, and the case is dismissed.
  • United States v. Algon Chem., Inc. 1988 April 12
    Regarding certain provisions of the United States Code which apply to new drugs and veterinary medicine, summary judgment is granted to the defendant in a case in which the United States applied to block transport of bulk veterinary drugs across state lines.
  • United States v. Ten Slot Machines 1988 January 27
    A motion for post-judgment interest on attorney's fees against the United States is denied when it is found that the Equal Access to Justice Act does not expressly call for interest on claims against the United States.
  • United States v. Anthony Dell'Aquila Enter. 1988 August 11
    In the case of a developer that violated several EPA regulations when demolishing properties that contained asbestos, the plantiff's preliminary injunction is granted and further demolition is enjoined.
  • United States v. Basulto 1988 February 09
    In the case of two men who wish to suppress their statements to the FBI, it is ruled that both were advised of their Miranda rights and their statements will stand.
  • United States v. Freeman 1988 June 06
    In the case of a man who was ordered to pay income taxes from prior years, summary judgment is granted for the plaintiff and the defendant is ordered to pay the assessed taxes plus interest and to provide answers and documents in response to the United States' interrogatories.
  • United States v. Gambino 1988 March 10
    In the case of a defendant who wishes to overturn his conviction for drug trafficking by claiming that his attorney provided inadequate counsel, it is ruled that there was no conflict of interest and the conviction should stand.
  • United States v. Vargas 1988 November 01
    A magistrate's order denying bail to two defendants on trial for trafficking narcotics is affirmed.
  • United States v. Wilson 1988 February 18
    A prisoner's motion to appeal his conviction based on several grounds is denied, without probable cause for appeal.
  • United States v. Zapata 1988 March 02
    A motion for reconsideration of sentence is denied as the original sentence is ruled fair and appropriate.
  • Vetere v. United States 1988 October 24
    In dismissing a defendant's motion to quash the search warrant and suppress evidence, it is found that by pleading guilty the defendant lost the right to then challenge evidence that should be identified in a pre-trial motion.
  • Viggiani v. U.S. Postal Office 1988 December 08
    Regarding a case against both the U.S. Postal Service and a realty company by a postal official who was hurt when she fell during work, the portion of the case against the postal service is dismissed for untimely filing, with the remaining action remanded to superior court.
  • Waigand v. Equal Employment Opportunity Program 1988 September 14
    In a suit against the postal service, the plaintiff is allowed to resubmit the name of the appropriate defendant, but a claim of irreparable harm is dismissed.

Associated People

Use Policy

Access There are no restrictions.
Use Restrictions There are no restrictions.
Preferred Citation

Papers of Judge John W. Bissell, MSS 05-1, Box Number, Special Collections, University of Virginia Law Library

Unless otherwise stated, digital materials in our collections are available for use under a Creative Commons BY 4.0 License (CC-BY-4.0). For Use and Citation guidelines, see Special Collections Use Policy.