Legal Opinion
Hart v. City of Jersey City
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided February 25, 1998PublishedCited by 31 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
The opinion of the court was delivered by
KESTIN, J.A.D.
Plaintiffs complaint alleged various causes of action in tort (the State law claims) and a cause of action under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (the § 1983 claim), all arising from certain actions of his superior *491officers in the Jersey City Police Department. The motion judge dismissed the State law claims on defendants’ motion for summary judgment, ruling
I don’t see any State claims in this case. There’s no malice. There’s no intentional infliction. There’s no outrageous conduct. The statement made in the in-house publication is a privileged statement…
2Cases cited45 opinions
- Monell v. New York City Dept. of Social Servs.Supreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Harlow v. FitzgeraldSupreme Court of the United States · 1982
- Anderson v. CreightonSupreme Court of the United States · 1987
- Mitchell v. ForsythSupreme Court of the United States · 1985
- New York Times Co. v. SullivanSupreme Court of the United States · 1964
40 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by31 opinions
- Lombardi v. MassoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2011
- Jacoby v. JacobyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2012
- In Re PSE & G Shareholder LitigationSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2002
- FRANKLIN MED. v. Newark Public Sch.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2003
- State v. K.P.S. and State v. Carmini LalooSupreme Court of New Jersey · 2015
26 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.