Court allowed parties to enter a status quo order staying the proceedings where necessary to protect plaintiff's interest in mandamus proceeding to challenge expiration of land development plan.

Aiding and abetting clause plausibly alleged as to sellers' advisors where they were involved in due diligence and thus plausibly could have assisted sellers in withholding material information, which breached representations and warranties.

No action clause in D&O insurance policy was enforceable and precluded insured from filing legal action against the insurer until the insured's financial obligations were fixed in an underlying litigation.

Person injured in an accident while removing cargo from the rear storage of a vehicle was entitled to PIP coverage under applicable New Jersey law.

News outlet's report that fairly summarized police arrest report was protected under the fair reporting privilege and not actionable in a defamation claim.

Industrial Accident Board correctly calculated divisor for determining average weekly wage by excluding a claimant's paid time off taken during weeks that they worked, as workers' compensation laws required exclusion of benefit time, including sick and vacation leave, from the calculation of a claimant's AWW.

Property owner owed no duty or liability to motor vehicle accident victim struck by an intoxicated motorist off-premises after owner found the motorist sleeping in his parked vehicle on the property in an apparent state of intoxication and woke him.

Receipt of notice of infringement only a day prior to the filing of the complaint was insufficient to charge defendant with pre-suit knowledge of the asserted patents.

Unemployment benefits claim was properly denied where worker received one year's worth of wages as a final payment upon separation from employment, meaning that the worker was not economically insecure and in need of unemployment compensation.

Court denied summary judgment to defendants for plaintiffs' contributory infringement claim where there were genuine issues of material fact as to whether defendants' product had other substantial non-infringing uses or whether defendants manufactured the product specifically for use in a manner that infringed upon plaintiffs' patents.