Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

31 KennethVan Dunk, Sr., et al. v. Reckson Associates Realty Corporation, et al. -- rank: 753

... to maintain a common-law tort action against the employer. N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. A series of cases from this Court have addressed what ... for overcoming the exclusivity of the workers’ compensation remedy. See N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. During argument on the motion, the trial court summarized the ... as an employee’s surrender of other forms of remedies. N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. In exchange for immunity from liability, the Act requires the ... the case satisfies the statutory exception for an intentional wrong. N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides that [i]f an injury or death is compensable ... employer’s act to lose the cloak of immunity of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, two conditions must be satisfied: (1) the employer must know ...

docket:	A-69-10
court:	NJ Supreme Court
decided:	2012-06-26
status:
citation:
Document Size:	146679

32 DAVID VAN WINKEL v. LEFRAK NEWPORT REALTY CORP -- rank: 743

... against it was therefore barred by the Workers' Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8.3 In addition, the judge found that ICC and Riverside ... entitlement to immunity from plaintiff's negligence action provided in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. The court also determined that Riverside and ICC were the ...

docket:	a5398-08
court:	superior court appellate division
decided:	2010-09-08
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	40287

33 BERNARD MENKEVICH v. DELTA TOOLS -- rank: 737

... as the person injured or killed, except for intentional wrong. [ N.J.S.A. 34:15-8.] In order for an employee to fall within the exception for an "intentional wrong" in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, the employee must establish that the employer knew that its ... employment and within the scope of the immunity provided by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. As we have explained, the evidence before the trial court ... under these circumstances. Therefore, defendant is entitled to immunity under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. III. Our conclusion is supported by Tomeo v. Thomas Whitesell ... motion for summary judgment based on the immunity provided by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Id. at 369. The trial court denied the motion, the ... and beyond any conduct the Legislature intended to immunize in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Ibid. Furthermore, when discussing the context prong of the ...

docket:	a1950-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-03-26
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	34267

34 GLEN J. HEUMAN v. WAYNE HEUMAN -- rank: 734

... employment.' N.J.S.A. 34:15- -7. See also N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. 'We have long recognized that [the WCA] is remedial legislation ... law tort claims for such injuries 'except for intentional wrong.' N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. To demonstrate an intentional wrong, the employee need not demonstrate ...

docket:	a1593-21
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2023-12-11
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	37233

35 VINCENT J. MULE v. NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY -- rank: 728

... barred by the provisions of the Worker's Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. We disagree and affirm.     The facts are not in dispute ... Mule's UM claim is barred by the provisions of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 because Mule's injuries are compensable under N.J.S ... the employer's parking lot between co-employees. We disagree. N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides, in pertinent part:         If an injury . . . is compensable under ...

docket:	A0930-01
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2003-01-06
status:	published
citation:	356 N.J. Super. 389 812 A.2d 112
Document Size:	20023

36 VOLB V. G.E. CAPITAL CORPORATION -- rank: 728

... regular employee of the borrowing employer against the special employee. N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides in pertinent part that         [i]f an injury or ... D.E. employee. As a result, the employer immunity of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 does not prohibit directly the Volb estate's suit against ... corporate subsidiaries of the same corporate parent to enjoy the N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 immunity vested in only one of the subsidiaries. Each corporation ... accepted is that a corporation may not share the immunity N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides to a sister subsidiary corporation. [ Id. at 10 (citation ...

docket:	a-66-93
court:	njsupreme
decided:	1995-01-24
status:
citation:	139 N.J. 110
Document Size:	94774

37 ERIC G. HANISKO v. BILLY CASPER GOLF MANAGEMENT INC. -- rank: 725

... J.S.A. 34:15-1 to —128, specifically, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Two months later, plaintiff filed a workers' compensation claim petition ... inquiry into the existence of an employer-employee relationship. See N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. The defense advanced in the workers' compensation action assumed the ...

docket:	a5053-12
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-09-08
status:	published
citation:	437 N.J.Super. 349 98 A.3d 1192
Document Size:	41028

38 JOSEPH SANSONE et al. v. TERRANCE L. JONES, et al. -- rank: 722

... barred by the exclusivity provisions of the Workers' Compensation Act, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 and because plaintiff failed to demonstrate that his injuries resulted ... injuries suffered by plaintiff were insufficient to allow recovery under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. In this regard, Newark asserted that plaintiff was a "special ... of law and that plaintiff was barred from recovery under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. However, the judge also concluded that plaintiff had demonstrated injuries ... and thus barred from pursuing his tort claim pursuant to N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. He argues that he received workers' compensation benefits for his ... s grant of summary judgment to the County pursuant to N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, we noted that the plaintiff could not be considered a ... he [was], therefore, not subject to the exclusivity provision of [ N.J.S.A. 34:15-8]." Id. at 241. Despite plaintiff's argument to the ...

docket:	A2121-06
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2007-12-11
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	38051

39 CHARLES JOHNSON v. PLASSER AMERICAN CORPORATION -- rank: 719

... against TGI. The employee alleged TGI committed an "intentional wrong," N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, thereby placing it outside the workers' compensation system. TGI's ... TGI's actions met the standard for intentional wrong under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 established in Laidlow v. Hariton Machinery Co. , 170 N.J ... the exclusive remedy provision of the Workers' Compensation Act (Act), N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Nonetheless, it was undisputed that Johnson's injuries were substantial ... the extent the Johnson plaintiffs were limited to recovery under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, umbrella policy coverage was excluded. TGI does not dispute that ... the exclusive realm of the worker's compensation system under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Ibid. The Court disagreed. Summarizing its holdings in Millison , supra ... Laidlow , supra , the Court held that an "intentional wrong" under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 may be established two ways: by proving that the ...

docket:	a2116-12
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2014-02-26
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	55408

40 HEIDI DELANE, et al. v. THE CITY OF NEWARK, et al. -- rank: 719

... wrong" exception to the exclusive remedy provision set forth by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 applies to an employer whose past and present practices have ... summary judgment pursuant to the exclusive remedy provisions set by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. The judge issued a written opinion granting summary judgment, dismissing ... in the shoes of her deceased husband by virtue of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides:         [i]f an injury or death is compensable under ... the trial court stated that the plaintiff failed to satisfy N.J.S.A. 34:15-8's definition of "intentional wrong". Id. at 179. We affirmed ...

docket:	A1407-99
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2001-07-24
status:	published
citation:	343 N.J. Super. 225
Document Size:	35399

41 NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY v. DELTA PLASTICS CORPORATION et al. -- rank: 719

... Thus Attune initially sought to avoid the workers' compensation bar, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8, by alleging "intentional" conduct and a "substantial certainty" of injury ... that constitutes an exception to the workers' compensation bar under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 is broader than the C-5 "injury intentionally caused" exclusion ... be outside the bounds of that which the Legislature intended N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 to protect against common law liability. Laidlow , supra , 170 N ... coverage for "all intentional wrongs within the exception allowed by N.J.S.A. 34:15-8." It does not. The exclusion therefore cannot fairly be construed ... workers' compensation bar, comparable to the Laidlow/Millison interpretation of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8: [A] plaintiff may escape the exclusivity of the Act and ... negligence is clearly insufficient to avoid the workers' compensation bar, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. See Tomeo v. Thomas Whitesell Constr. Co., Inc. 176 ...

docket:	A2126-03
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2005-09-30
status:	published
citation:	380 N.J. Super. 532 883 A.2d 399
Document Size:	71662

42 YAKUP ACIKGOZ v. NEW JERSEY TURNPIKE AUTHORITY -- rank: 716

... damages. Lowden answered the complaint and asserted the provisions of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 as an affirmative defense to the tort action, claiming both ... of "jurisdiction to [the Division]," "to determine the application of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8," to determine "whether [petitioner's] motor vehicle accident . . . was compensable ... J.S.A. 34:15-1 and the applicability of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. In a written opinion dated October 26, 2006, he determined ... their employment at the time of the accident, that therefore N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 did not apply, and that petitioner's accident was not ... collided with petitioner's vehicle. Therefore, the bar contained in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 did not apply. Affirmed. Judge Axelrad did not participate in ...

docket:	A1758-06
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2008-01-23
status:	published
citation:	398 N.J.Super. 79 939 A.2d 805
Document Size:	53126

43 MARTHA ORBE v. THE MANITOWIC COMPANY INC -- rank: 716

... worker for work-related injuries, except for an "intentional wrong." N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. An employer who causes the death or injury of an ... thereby entitling a plaintiff to avoid the 'exclusivity' bar of N.J.S.A. 34:15-8[.]" Millison , supra , 101 N.J. at 176. There, the plaintiffs ...

docket:	a5614-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-03-08
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	65375

44 WILLIAM J. HAMMER v. DOUGLAS W. THOMAS -- rank: 713

... remedy bar of the Workers' Compensation Act. Ibid. ; see also N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 (providing a narrow exception permitting a common-law action for ... 602 , 613 (2002), which clarified that an intentional wrong under N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 included "'actions taken with a subjective desire to harm' as ... law, namely the "intentional wrong" exception to exclusivity contained in N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Notably, the Court did not cite either Cumberland Mutual , decided ...

docket:	a0742-08
court:	New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2010-08-09
status:	published
citation:	415 N.J.Super. 237 1 A.3d 784
Document Size:	60830

45 MARIE CONRAD v. NELIA J. ROBBI, TRENTON BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al. -- rank: 713

... not barred by fellow-servant doctrine which is codified at N.J.S.A. 34:15-8. Ordinarily, the Workers' Compensation Act provides the exclusive remedy for ... Danek v. Hommer , 9 N.J. 56 , 62 (1952). Indeed, N.J.S.A. 34:15-8 provides that:         Such agreement shall be a surrender by the ... as the person injured or killed, except for intentional wrong.         [ N.J.S.A. 34:15-8]     The purpose of the amendment was not so much to ...

docket:	A2247-99
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2001-06-25
status:	published
citation:	341 N.J. Super. 424
Document Size:	47567