Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

1 CIVALIER V. THE ESTATE OF MARGARET J. TRANCUCCI -- rank: 1000

... public entities and found in the plain language of both N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 and 59:4-4. Moreover, in view of widespread vandalism ... entities filed motions for summary judgment on the basis that N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 grants them immunity from liability for "failure to provide ordinary ... or unexpected occurrence or condition calling for immediate action under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. The Appellate Division denied leave to appeal that ruling. We ... of immunity for failure to place a traffic signal under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 did not apply because the true cause of the dangerous ... controlled intersection that provided him the right of way. Although N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 explicitly grants public entities immunity from liability "for an injury ... the immunity for failure to provide ordinary traffic signals under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5? Spin Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co. , 136 N.J. ...

docket:	a-93-93
court:	njsupreme
decided:	1994-10-20
status:
citation:	138 N.J. 52
Document Size:	93573

2 LETTITIA JACKSON v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY -- rank: 841

... we do not agree with the judge's conclusion that N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 confers immunity, we do agree with his determination concerning N ... because neither of the statutes upon which the judge relied, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 or 59:2-3(c), (d), affords immunity to the ... denied , 108 N.J. 182 (1987). We turn first to N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which provides that a public entity is not liable: for ... provide ordinary traffic signals, signs, markings or other similar devices. [ N.J.S.A. 59:4-5.] We must decide whether the trial judge was correct when he concluded that the immunity provided in N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 applies to the State's failure to provide a pedestrian ... near the Cherry Hill Mall. The statutory immunity contained in N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 applies to a public entity's failure to provide ...

docket:	a4975-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-12-21
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	38761

3 JOSEPH G. CASELLA v. TOWNSHIP OF MANALAPAN -- rank: 826

... entitled to judgment as a matter of law pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, the TCA's "traffic-sign immunity" provision. He also concluded ... in dismissing his complaint based upon the immunity provided by N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. Plaintiff also contends that if the judge had properly applied ... citing Kolitch v. Lindedahl , 100 N.J. 485 , 497 (1985)). N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 provides, "[n]either a public entity nor a public employee ... for not posting a traffic sign." Id. at 69 (citing N.J.S.A. 59:4-5); see also Aebi v. Monmouth Cnty. Highway Dep't , 148 N.J. Super. 430 , 433 (App. Div. 1977) (finding N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 "clear and unambiguous" and applicable to immunize county for failing ... proof stop signs). The Court also concluded that, based upon N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, DOT was immune from liability premised upon the failure ...

docket:	a0139-13
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2015-05-05
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	35589

4 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/appellate/squibs16-17.opn.html -- rank: 798

... 59:2-3(a). Defendants are also accorded immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which provides that a public entity is not liable for ... because school zones require a higher standard of care. Although N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 does not expressly define the term 'ordinary,' the court uses ...

docket:
court:	NJ Superior Court Law/Chancery Division
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	151111

5 I'ASIA MORELAND v. Estate of WILLIAM PARKS -- rank: 791

... signs was barred by the traffic signal immunity provided under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. The judge rejected their claims that 59:4-4, the ... or signs along Route 129, Title 59 provides immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which states: 'Neither a public entity nor a public employee ...

docket:	a1645-19
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2021-12-28
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	53343

6 BRYCE PATRICK v. CITY OF ELIZABETH -- rank: 776

... constructive, of a dangerous condition. The City also argued that N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 provided immunity for a public entity's failure to provide ... Judge Ciarrocca also noted the immunity accorded to defendants under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which provides that a public entity is not liable for ... J.S.A. 59:4-2. 5 We disagree. Although N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 does not expressly define the term "ordinary," we have previously ... and are satisfied that defendants were immunized from liability under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 because the determination as to the advisability or necessity of ... device at any particular place requires the exercise of discretion. " N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ... N.J. Super. 430 , 433 (App. Div. 1977) (finding that " N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 is entirely consistent with N.J.S.A. 59: ...

docket:	a2792-15
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2017-04-24
status:	published
citation:	449 N.J.Super. 565 159 A.3d 906
Document Size:	39498

7 JOAO ROCHA v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY -- rank: 763

... Highway Dept. , 148 N.J. Super. 430 (App. Div. 1977)); N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 (immunity for failure to provide ordinary traffic signals). C. The ...

docket:	a0616-15
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2017-06-02
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	35913

8 ALBERT WOOD v. TOWNSHIP OF WALL -- rank: 743

... 2(a) and (b), governing dangerous conditions on public property; N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which provides a public entity with immunity "for an injury ... notes, Title 59 provides absolute sign immunity." The judge cited N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which provides immunity for injuries "caused by the failure to ... provide "ordinary traffic signals, signs, markings, or other similar devices." N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 (emphasis added). Although "traffic" is undefined in the TCA, Title ... Our conclusion is consistent with the broad construction given to N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 in other less-novel circumstances. See , e.g. , Kolitch v ...

docket:	a0751-12
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2013-12-17
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	44069

9 ANTHONY SCHANZ v. TOWNSHIP OF WINSLOW -- rank: 738

... Court determined . . . there was no municipal liability and . . . cite[d] [ N.J.S.A. ] 59:4-5 and [ N.J.S.A. ] 59:4-4. And it ... simple suggestions for inexpensive repairs" was palpably unreasonable. We disagree. N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 provides that "[n]either a public entity nor a public ... any particular place requires the exercise of discretion, and hence N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ... warning signs" and "transverse rumble strips" implicate immunity pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. Defendant's failure to implement these suggestions was not palpably ...

docket:	a6056-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-02-06
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	50829

10 THOMAS M. PERINA v. ALLEN B. CATBAGAN -- rank: 723

... for plan and design of the highway improvements and under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 for alleged failure to post warning signs. Perina responded that ... J.S.A. 59:4-6, and the traffic sign, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, provisions of the Tort Claims Act. We agree with defendants ... of the State defendants. A public entity has immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 for failing to provide ordinary traffic signals or warning signs ... failure to post warning signs. We noted in Aebi that N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 is "clear and unambiguous," and we stated further that "[t ... any particular place requires the exercise of discretion, and hence N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ... 433; see also Manna , supra , 129 N.J. at 355 ( N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 grants immunity for the failure to post warning signals); ...

docket:	a1299-08
court:	superior court appellate division
decided:	2010-07-07
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	90038

11 VANCE BANKS v. KELLY L. GUNDERSON -- rank: 700

... 3, its failure to warn of a roadway hazard under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, and defects in its plan and design of the road ...

docket:	a0569-16
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2018-05-30
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	130811

12 MADHAVI PANDYA, et al. v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -- rank: 693

... seeking to strike the DOT's defense asserting immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. On July 3, 2003, the trial judge entered orders granting ... a "dangerous condition" under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which states that the public entity is not liable for ... signs and roadway markers. The ordinary traffic signals immunity statute, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, provides: "Neither a public entity nor a public employee is ... any particular place requires the exercise of discretion, and hence N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ... the Weiser court did not hold or imply that the N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 immunity would not apply to the State; the State's ... at issue here do not fall within the immunity of N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, because the issue here involved the State's action ...

docket:	A0813-03
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2005-02-28
status:	published
citation:	375 N.J. Super. 353 867 A.2d 123
Document Size:	45436

13 MADHAVI PANDYA, et al. v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY and DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION -- rank: 693

... seeking to strike the DOT's defense asserting immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. On July 3, 2003, the trial judge entered orders granting ... a "dangerous condition" under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which states that the public entity is not liable for ... signs and roadway markers. The ordinary traffic signals immunity statute, N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, provides: "Neither a public entity nor a public employee is ... any particular place requires the exercise of discretion, and hence N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ... the Weiser court did not hold or imply that the N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 immunity would not apply to the State; the State's ... at issue here do not fall within the immunity of N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, because the issue here involved the State's action ...

docket:	A0954-03
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2005-02-28
status:	published
citation:
Document Size:	45311

14 ALEXANDER FERRIS, v. AIDA BLANCO-ALQUACIL -- rank: 688

... the accident. Additionally, for the first time, Middlesex asserts that N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 specifically immunizes a public entity 'for an injury caused by ... 148 N.J. Super. 430, 433 (App. Div. 1977) (finding N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 'clear and unambiguous' and applicable to immunize county for failing ... s decision to place signs at other intersections cannot overcome N.J.S.A. 59:4-5, which immunized Middlesex's discretionary decision not to post an ... any particular place requires the exercise of discretion, and hence N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 simply specifies one particular type of discretionary activity to which ...

docket:	a0317-18
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2019-10-17
status:	Unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	24098

15 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/appellate/a1380-20.opn.html -- rank: 683

... 2; and 3) the Borough is immune from liability under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5. After hearing oral argument, the motion court granted summary judgment ... Finally, the trial court determined the Borough was immune under N.J.S.A. 59:4-5 for failure to provide ordinary traffic markings or devices, and ...

docket:
court:	NJ Superior Court Law/Chancery Division
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	33573