New Jersey Statutes
N.J. Stat. § 2A:53A-10 (2026)
Remedial legislation; liberal construction
✓ laws through the 2025 session (retrieved May 2026)
This act shall be deemed to be remedial and shall be liberally construed so as to afford immunity to the said corporations, societies and associations from liability as provided herein in furtherance of the public policy for the protection of nonprofit corporations, societies and associations organized for religious, charitable, educational or hospital purposes.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 16
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 1983–2026 · leading case: Frances Green v. Monmouth Univ. (080612) (Monmouth Cnty. & Statewide), 206 A.3d 394 (N.J. 2019).
Frances Green v. Monmouth Univ. (080612) (Monmouth Cnty. & Statewide), 206 A.3d 394 (N.J. 2019). “3d 83 (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10). The majority noted that "the term 'educational' has been broadly interpreted and not limited to purely scholastic activities," ibid.”
F.K. Vs. Integrity House, Inc., 213 A.3d 937 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). “[N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10.] Nonetheless, "[o]nly those classes of entities that were immunized under common law remain within the sweep of the Act.”
Feniello v. Univ. of Pennsylvania Hosp., 558 F. Supp. 1365 (D.N.J. 1983). “Moreover, as a matter of statutory construction, it is elementary that laws enacted by a state legislature must be assumed to apply only to institutions which are either incorporated in or located within that state.”
Michael C. Kain v. Gloucester City, 94 A.3d 937 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014). “" N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10. Charitable immunity is an affirmative defense.”
Nazzaro v. United States, 304 F. Supp. 2d 605 (D.N.J. 2004). “” N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:53A-10. Plaintiffs do not challenge that CAP is a non-profit corporation, nor that Plaintiffs are beneficiaries as defined under the statute.”
Young v. United States, 190 F. Supp. 3d 378 (D.N.J. 2016). “Indeed, the New Jersey Supreme Court in O’Connell considered and rejected this policy argument made by Young, relying on the plain language of the statute and the instruction of the legislature as codified in N.J.S.A 2A:53A-10 to “liberally construe[]” the NJCIA, rather than…”
Hottenstein v. City of Sea Isle City, 981 F. Supp. 2d 292 (D.N.J. 2013). “2009) (alteration in original) (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10). To determine beneficiary status under one such companion provision, N.”
Seiderman v. Am. Inst. for Mental Studies, 667 F. Supp. 154 (D.N.J. 1987). “In response, defendants point to the legislative admonition, contained in N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10, that the statute “shall be deemed to be remedial and shall be liberally construed so as to afford immunity to the said corporations .”
Margaret Gryger Vs. Perkins Ctr. for the Arts, No. A-4550-17T1 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Oct. 24, 2019). “[N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10.] Nonetheless, "[o]nly those classes of entities that were immunized under common law remain within the sweep of the Act.”
West v. De Block, No. 3:17-cv-08894 (D.N.J. Sept. 30, 2020). ““[I]t is elementary that laws enacted by a state legislature must be assumed to apply only to institutions which are either incorporated in or located within that state.”
Cassandra Gigi Smith v. Newark Cmty. Health Centers, Inc., No. A-67-24 (N.J. June 10, 2026). “” N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10 requires that the CIA “be liberally construed so as to afford immunity .”
Sabrina Losada Vs. Princeton Univ., No. A-3606-15T4 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. Aug. 24, 2017). “132, 167 (2008) (quoting N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-10). The CIA provides immunity to any "nonprofit corporation .”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.