Legal Opinion
Fine v. Rutgers
Supreme Court of New Jersey
Decided April 13, 2000PublishedCited by 10 opinions
1Opinion of the CourtStein, J.
This interlocutory appeal requires us to decide whether defendant Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey, is a public agency for purposes of Rule 4:3-2(a), In pertinent part that Rule requires that actions not affecting real property instituted by or against “public agencies” be brought in the county in which the cause of action arose. Plaintiff Seymour H. Fine (“Fine”), an associate professor at the Rutgers-Newark campus, instituted this action against Rutgers in the Superior Court, Law Division, Bergen County alleging breach of contract and age discrimination. Relying on Rule 4:3-2(a),…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Fuchilla v. LaymanSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
- Rutgers v. PilusoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1972
- Keddie v. Rutgers, State UniversitySupreme Court of New Jersey · 1997
- TRUSTEES OF RUTGERS COLLEGE IN NJ v. RichmanNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1956
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by10 opinions
- Sussex Commons Associates, LLC v. RutgersSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2012
- Children's Health Defense Inc. v.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2024
- Wilson v. BrownNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2009
- Colt v. New Jersey Tr. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
- Colt v. New Jersey Tr. Corp.Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 2022
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.