Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 2002–2026 1 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Strasenburgh v. Straubmullergreen2 sentences2018Plaintiff partially withdrew his claims of mismanagement (count III) and fraud (count VI) at trial to the extent they pertain *303 to the agreement to sell IFP's assets to Pace Plumbing Corp. These claims are captured by the breach of fiduciary duty claim (count I), which we "generally regard[ ] as derivative claims unless *127 the injury to shares is distinct." Strasenburgh , 146 N.J. at 552 , 683 A.2d 818 (citation omitted). 2018Plaintiff partially withdrew his claims of mismanagement (count III) and fraud (count VI) at trial to the extent they pertain *303 to the agreement to sell IFP's assets to Pace Plumbing Corp. These claims are captured by the breach of fiduciary duty claim (count I), which we "generally regard[ ] as derivative claims unless *127 the injury to shares is distinct." Strasenburgh , 146 N.J. at 552 , 683 A.2d 818 (citation omitted). | 1 | 2 |
Eduardo Cortez v. Joseph G. Gindhart, Esquire D/B/A Joseph G. Gindhart & Associates and Joseph G. Gindhart & Associatesgreen1 sentence2026See Cortez, 435 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Harbor Commuter Serv., Inc. v. Frenkel & Co.
green
1 sentence2018In stark contrast, "[i]nsurance brokers stand in a fiduciary capacity with their clients , to whom they owe a duty to exercise reasonable skill and good faith." Harbor Commuter Serv., Inc. v. Frenkel & Co. , 401 N.J. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Hazzard v. Chase National Bank
green
1 sentence2018The breach of any duty an indenture trustee does owe "neither gives rise to fiduciary duties nor supports" a breach of fiduciary duty claim, ibid. (alteration in original). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
County of Essex v. First Union Bank
green
1 sentence2006Id. at 548, 862 A.2d 1168 . | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Anyanwu v. Anyanwu
green
1 sentence2004James v. Future Finance, 342 N.J.Super. 310, 343 , 776 A. 2d 849 (App.Div.) (holding that a plaintiff could not collect both treble damages under RICO and punitive damages under a breach of fiduciary duty claim), certif. denied, 170 N.J. 388 , 788 A. 2d 773 (2001). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Petrusky v. Maxfli Dunlop Sports Corp.
green
1 sentence2004James v. Future Finance, 342 N.J.Super. 310, 343 , 776 A. 2d 849 (App.Div.) (holding that a plaintiff could not collect both treble damages under RICO and punitive damages under a breach of fiduciary duty claim), certif. denied, 170 N.J. 388 , 788 A. 2d 773 (2001). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
St. James v. Future Finance
green
2 sentences2004James v. Future Finance, 342 N.J.Super. 310, 343 , 776 A. 2d 849 (App.Div.) (holding that a plaintiff could not collect both treble damages under RICO and punitive damages under a breach of fiduciary duty claim), certif. denied, 170 N.J. 388 , 788 A. 2d 773 (2001). 2004James v. Future Finance, 342 N.J.Super. 310, 343 , 776 A. 2d 849 (App.Div.) (holding that a plaintiff could not collect both treble damages under RICO and punitive damages under a breach of fiduciary duty claim), certif. denied, 170 N.J. 388 , 788 A. 2d 773 (2001). | 1 | 2004–2004 |
Scribner v. O'Brien, Inc.
green
1 sentence2002Id. at 541-42 , 562 A.2d 208 . *315 An independent duty was found to exist in Scribner, supra, 363 A.2d at 168 . | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Samuel v. Doe
green
2 sentences2002See *333 R. 2:2-l(a)(2); Samuel v. Doe, 158 N.J. 134, 140 , 727 A.2d 1016 (1999). 2002See *333 R. 2:2-l(a)(2); Samuel v. Doe, 158 N.J. 134, 140 , 727 A.2d 1016 (1999). | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Walker Rogge, Inc. v. Chelsea Title & Guaranty Co.
green
2 sentences2002In granting summary judgment for the defendant on the breach of fiduciary duty claim, the District Court relied on our decision in Walker Rogge, supra, 116 N.J. at 535 , 562 A.2d 208 , in which we held that “a title company’s liability is limited to the policy and ... the company is not liable in tort for negligence.” In Walker Rogge , we found that the cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty sounded in contract rather than tort, and remanded the matter to the trial court to determine whether the title insurance company had assumed any duties apart from those explicitly stated in the insu 2002In granting summary judgment for the defendant on the breach of fiduciary duty claim, the District Court relied on our decision in Walker Rogge, supra, 116 N.J. at 535 , 562 A.2d 208 , in which we held that “a title company’s liability is limited to the policy and ... the company is not liable in tort for negligence.” In Walker Rogge , we found that the cause of action for breach of fiduciary duty sounded in contract rather than tort, and remanded the matter to the trial court to determine whether the title insurance company had assumed any duties apart from those explicitly stated in the insu | 1 | 2002–2002 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.