limitation of liability clause in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 1 courts 1977–2019 0 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.

Followed or applied (7)

Case	Followed	Cited
Nahra v. Honeywell, Inc.green ohnd · 1995 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2019–2019 2 sentences 2019See Nahra v. Honeywell, Inc., 892 F. Supp. 962, 969 (N.D. 2019Under Ohio law, "[a] party seeking to avoid a limitations clause on grounds of unconscionability must show that the clause is commercially unreasonable and that he had no meaningful choice but to accept its inclusion in the contract." Nahra v. Honeywell, Inc., 892 F. Supp. 962, 970 (N.D.	1	1
Gonzalez v. A-1 Self Storage, Inc.green njsuperctappdiv · 2000 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003See Gonzalez v. A-1 Self Storage, Inc., 350 N.J.Super. 403, 410 , 795 A. 2d 885, 889 (Law Div.2000) (finding unconscionable a limitation of liability clause in a storage agreement which fell under N.J.S.A. 12A:7-204(2)); accord Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 518 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 649-50 . 2003See Gonzalez v. A-1 Self Storage, Inc., 350 N.J.Super. 403, 410 , 795 A. 2d 885, 889 (Law Div.2000) (finding unconscionable a limitation of liability clause in a storage agreement which fell under N.J.S.A. 12A:7-204(2)); accord Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 518 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 649-50 .	1	1
Lerner v. Brettschneidergreen arizctapp · 1979 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 519 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 650 ; World Prods., Inc. v. Cent. 2003See Gonzalez v. A-1 Self Storage, Inc., 350 N.J.Super. 403, 410 , 795 A. 2d 885, 889 (Law Div.2000) (finding unconscionable a limitation of liability clause in a storage agreement which fell under N.J.S.A. 12A:7-204(2)); accord Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 518 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 649-50 .	1	1
Howard v. Handler Bros. & Winell, Inc.green nyappdiv · 1951 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2003–2003 2 sentences 2003The defendant's entire defense rested on a limitation of liability clause providing "[o]ur [l]iability is limited to the sum of $10 unless a declared valuation is placed on the garment to be stored and an extra charge for insurance is made." Ibid. 2003The court characterized the $10 valuation as "off-handed," noting that the defendant "could just as well, under the terms of the agreement, have insisted upon a limitation of $1." Id. at 752.	1	1
Shamblin v. Nationwide Mutual Insurancegreen wva · 1985 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1992–1992 2 sentences 1992Id., 332 S.E. 2d at 645, 646 . 1992Id., 332 S.E. 2d at 645, 646 .	1	1
Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co.green michctapp · 1969 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1988–1988 2 sentences 1988Also, Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 18 Mich. App. 632 , 171 N.W. 2d 689, 692 (Ct.App.Mich. 1969), appeal after remand, 61 Mich. App. 62 , 232 N.W. 2d 302 (Ct.App.Mich. 1975), which was relied upon by the trial court, recognized that the limitation of liability clause should not be voided based on unconscionability "if the term is substantively reasonable." Whether the remedy provided by contract was adequate or "substantively reasonable" is a mixed question of fact and law which should not be decided in a summary fashion unless there is no genuine dispute as to the amount of damages so 1988Also, Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 18 Mich. App. 632 , 171 N.W. 2d 689, 692 (Ct.App.Mich. 1969), appeal after remand, 61 Mich. App. 62 , 232 N.W. 2d 302 (Ct.App.Mich. 1975), which was relied upon by the trial court, recognized that the limitation of liability clause should not be voided based on unconscionability "if the term is substantively reasonable." Whether the remedy provided by contract was adequate or "substantively reasonable" is a mixed question of fact and law which should not be decided in a summary fashion unless there is no genuine dispute as to the amount of damages so	1	1
CARBONE v. Cortlandt Realty Corp.green nj · 1971 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1977–1977 1 sentence 1977Carbone v. Cortlandt Realty Corp., 58 N.J. 366, 368 (1971); Horelick v. Pennsylvania R.	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (9)

Case	Cited	Years
Wasserman's Inc. v. Township of Middletown green nj · 1994 1 sentence 2019Accordingly, National Fire's reliance on Wasserman, Inc. v. Township of Middletown, 137 N.J. 238 (1994), for the standards to evaluate the enforceability of a liquidated damages provision, is misplaced.	1	2019–2019
Lucier v. Williams green njsuperctappdiv · 2004 2 sentences 2007In Lucier , we noted that the $500,000 of errors and omissions coverage required by the applicable statute would provide home inspectors with adequate protection from liability for their negligence, while enforcement of a limitation of liability clause would leave a home buyer without any recourse for the inspector's negligence, with a "potentially severe [economic impact] to the home buyer[.]" Id. at 499 , 841 A. 2d 907 . 2007In Lucier , we noted that the $500,000 of errors and omissions coverage required by the applicable statute would provide home inspectors with adequate protection from liability for their negligence, while enforcement of a limitation of liability clause would leave a home buyer without any recourse for the inspector's negligence, with a "potentially severe [economic impact] to the home buyer[.]" Id. at 499 , 841 A. 2d 907 .	1	2007–2007
Carter v. Reichlin Furriers green connsuperct · 1977 2 sentences 2003Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 519 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 650 ; World Prods., Inc. v. Cent. 2003See Gonzalez v. A-1 Self Storage, Inc., 350 N.J.Super. 403, 410 , 795 A. 2d 885, 889 (Law Div.2000) (finding unconscionable a limitation of liability clause in a storage agreement which fell under N.J.S.A. 12A:7-204(2)); accord Lerner, supra, 598 P. 2d at 518 ; Carter, supra, 386 A. 2d at 649-50 .	1	2003–2003
World Products, Inc. v. Central Freight Service, Inc. green njd · 1963 1 sentence 2003For example, World Prods., Inc., supra, held that unlike the situation in Henningsen , where the seller had unfair bargaining power, a limitation of liability clause is enforceable "where both parties are business corporations, engaged in a commercial relationship ... over an extended period of time." 222 F.Supp. at 852 .	1	2003–2003
Valhal Corp. v. Sullivan Associates, Inc., Architects, Planners, Engineers green ca3 · 1995 1 sentence 1996Ibid.	1	1996–1996
Saxon Const. & Management Corp. v. Masterclean of North Carolina green njsuperctappdiv · 1994 2 sentences 1996In the process of fulfilling that obligation, the Borough contends that it had to rely upon the engineer’s sense of responsibility and ignore “limiting conditions.” It is a well-settled principle “that parties bargaining at arms-length may generally contract as they wish.” Saxon Const., 273 N.J.Super. at 235 , 641 A.2d 1056 . 1996In the process of fulfilling that obligation, the Borough contends that it had to rely upon the engineer’s sense of responsibility and ignore “limiting conditions.” It is a well-settled principle “that parties bargaining at arms-length may generally contract as they wish.” Saxon Const., 273 N.J.Super. at 235 , 641 A.2d 1056 .	1	1996–1996
Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co. green michctapp · 1975 2 sentences 1988Also, Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 18 Mich. App. 632 , 171 N.W. 2d 689, 692 (Ct.App.Mich. 1969), appeal after remand, 61 Mich. App. 62 , 232 N.W. 2d 302 (Ct.App.Mich. 1975), which was relied upon by the trial court, recognized that the limitation of liability clause should not be voided based on unconscionability "if the term is substantively reasonable." Whether the remedy provided by contract was adequate or "substantively reasonable" is a mixed question of fact and law which should not be decided in a summary fashion unless there is no genuine dispute as to the amount of damages so 1988Also, Allen v. Michigan Bell Telephone Co., 18 Mich. App. 632 , 171 N.W. 2d 689, 692 (Ct.App.Mich. 1969), appeal after remand, 61 Mich. App. 62 , 232 N.W. 2d 302 (Ct.App.Mich. 1975), which was relied upon by the trial court, recognized that the limitation of liability clause should not be voided based on unconscionability "if the term is substantively reasonable." Whether the remedy provided by contract was adequate or "substantively reasonable" is a mixed question of fact and law which should not be decided in a summary fashion unless there is no genuine dispute as to the amount of damages so	1	1988–1988
In Re Application of Saddle River green nj · 1976 1 sentence 1977A tariff was recently defined in the case of In re Application of Saddle River, 71 N.J. 14 (1976), as follows: A tariff is a published schedule of rates, filed by a public utility, and thereafter, in the absence of successful challenge, applicable equally to all customers.	1	1977–1977
Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield green nj · 1954 1 sentence 1977This record contains complex factual assertions in support of the allegations made in the complaint, and it is clear that the entry of summary judgment at this stage of the proceedings would be inappropriate, Judson v. Peoples Bank and Trust Co. of Westfield, 17 N.J. 67 (1954).	1	1977–1977

Where else courts name it

TX 22 (1978–2025) NY 21 (1931–2025) CA 17 (1987–2026) GA 13 (1944–2023) OH 12 (1973–2015) LA 12 (1975–2018) MS 11 (1979–2026) PA 10 (1969–2024) IL 9 (1981–2015) IN 8 (1983–2004) NJ 7 (1977–2019) WV 7 (1985–2017) NC 5 (1990–2024) NM 5 (1994–2015) CO 5 (1961–2013) AZ 5 (1977–2023) KS 4 (1993–2009) CT 4 (1992–2002) FL 4 (1963–2011) OR 4 (1930–2022) MA 3 (1995–2018) OK 3 (1992–2006) NE 3 (1997–2025) AL 3 (1993–2005) DE 3 (1977–2019) AR 3 (1992–2013) SD 3 (2002–2002) WA 3 (1999–2002) MT 2 (1973–2017) HI 2 (2009–2017) MI 2 (1969–1986) MO 2 (2009–2013) NH 2 (1986–2020)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check