7 New Jersey opinions name it 1 courts 2017–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Scafidi v. Seilergreen2 sentences2025"Proximate cause is a factual issue, to be resolved by the jury after appropriate instruction by the trial court." Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93, 101 (1990). 2024Once a prima facie showing is established, "[p]roximate cause is a factual issue, to be resolved by the jury after appropriate instruction by the trial court." Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93, 101 (1990). | 5 | 7 |
Deborah Townsend v. Noah Pierre (072357)green2 sentences2026Super. 222 , 234 (App. Div. 2019) (quoting Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93, 101 (1990)); see, e.g., Townsend, 221 N.J. at 59-60 . 2025Super. 222 , 234 (App. Div. 2019) (quoting Scafidi v. Seiler, 119 N.J. 93, 101 (1990)); see, e.g., Townsend, 221 N.J. at 59-60 . | 2 | 2 |
Wytupeck v. City of Camdengreen1 sentence2019We may only overturn a jury verdict if it "is so far contrary to the weight of the evidence as to give rise to the inescapable conclusion of mistake, passion, prejudice, or partiality." Wytupeck v. City of Camden, 25 N.J. 450, 466 (1957). | 1 | 1 |
Winstock v. Galassogreen1 sentence2017Thus, "proximate cause is generally an issue for the jury." Miller v. Estate of Sperling, 166 N.J. 370, 386 (2001); accord Winstock v. Galasso, 430 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Miller v. Estate of Sperlinggreen1 sentence2017Thus, "proximate cause is generally an issue for the jury." Miller v. Estate of Sperling, 166 N.J. 370, 386 (2001); accord Winstock v. Galasso, 430 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||