New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 59:2-1 (2026)

Immunity of public entity generally

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

a. Except as otherwise provided by this act, a public entity is not liable for an injury, whether such injury arises out of an act or omission of the public entity or a public employee or any other person.

b. Any liability of a public entity established by this act is subject to any immunity of the public entity and is subject to any defenses that would be available to the public entity if it were a private person.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 87 cases (44 in the last 5 years), 1978–2026 · leading case: Manna v. State, 609 A.2d 757 (N.J. 1992).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Manna v. State, 609 A.2d 757 (N.J. 1992). · cites it 7× “§ 59:2-1, unless liability is specified. Even when that liability exists, however, it may be subject to specific statutory immunities.”

Michael C. Kain v. Gloucester City, 94 A.3d 937 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014). · cites it 6× “59:2-1(b) "is intended to insure that any immunity provisions provided in the act or by common law will prevail over the liability provisions," Report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Sovereign Immunity, Comment to N.J.S.A. 59:2-1, at 210 (May, 1972) (Task Force Comment…”

Bligen v. Jersey City Hous. Auth., 619 A.2d 575 (N.J. 1993). · cites it 4× “§ 59:2-1, further states, courts should employ an analysis that first asks " whether an immunity applies and if not, should liability attach.”

Rachel A. Parsons v. Mullica Twp. Bd. of Educ., 111 A.3d 144 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2015). · cites it 3× “" N.J.S.A. 59:2-1(a). The TCA provides that "[a] public entity is liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of a public employee within the scope of his employment in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”

Endl v. New Jersey, 5 F. Supp. 3d 689 (D.N.J. 2014). · cites it 2× “N.J.S.A. 59:2-1; Greenway Dev. Co., Inc. v.”

Garlanger v. Verbeke, 223 F. Supp. 2d 596 (D.N.J. 2002). “Consistent with the legislation’s goal of restricting governmental liability in tort, the Act provides that, in order to maintain a tort claim against a public entity or public employee, a plaintiff must file a notice of claim with the appropriate public entity within 90 days of…”

Troth v. State, 566 A.2d 515 (N.J. 1989). · cites it 2× “" Comment, § 59:2-1. By recognizing the present cause of action, Justice O'Hern's concurring opinion flouts that clear legislative admonition.”

Smith v. Fireworks by Girone, Inc., 850 A.2d 456 (N.J. 2004). “” N.J.S.A 59:2-1. “The theme of the [TCA] is immunity for public entities with liability as the exception.”

L.E. & P.T. Vs. the Plainfield Pub. Sch. Dist. Vs. A.D. & R.B. (l-2513-15, Union Cnty. & Statewide) (record Impounded), 194 A.3d 105 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018). “" N.J.S.A. 59:2-1. But, the Act states generally that "[a] public entity is liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of a public employee within the scope of his employment in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like…”

Saldana v. DiMedio, 646 A.2d 522 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1994). “59:2-4 concerns the immunity of public entities and provides: "A public entity is not liable for an injury caused by adopting or failing to adopt a law or by failing to enforce any law.”

Blunt v. Klapproth, 707 A.2d 1021 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1998). “In addition, we question the applicability of the special relationship doctrine to case law in this state.”

Horan v. State, 514 A.2d 78 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1986). “Subsection [N.J.S.A. 59:2-1] (b) is intended to insure that any immunity provisions provided in the act or by common law will prevail over the liability provisions.”

Show all 87 citing cases →

— N.J. Stat. § 59:2-1(a) — 43 cases

Manna v. State, 609 A.2d 757 (N.J. 1992). “§ 59:2-1, unless liability is specified. Even when that liability exists, however, it may be subject to specific statutory immunities.”

Michael C. Kain v. Gloucester City, 94 A.3d 937 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2014). “59:2-1(b) "is intended to insure that any immunity provisions provided in the act or by common law will prevail over the liability provisions," Report of the Attorney General's Task Force on Sovereign Immunity, Comment to N.J.S.A. 59:2-1, at 210 (May, 1972) (Task Force Comment…”

Rachel A. Parsons v. Mullica Twp. Bd. of Educ., 111 A.3d 144 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2015). “" N.J.S.A. 59:2-1(a). The TCA provides that "[a] public entity is liable for injury proximately caused by an act or omission of a public employee within the scope of his employment in the same manner and to the same extent as a private individual under like circumstances.”

Russell Forde Hornor v. Upper Freehold Reg'l Bd. of Educ. (N.J. 2026).

Elvira Levitina Vs. New Jersey Transit Corp. (l-3781-18, Middlesex Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2021).

— N.J. Stat. § 59:2-1(a)(1) — 1 case

Jane Jlw Roe v. Jersey City Pub. Schs. (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2026).

— N.J. Stat. § 59:2-1(b) — 15 cases

Bligen v. Jersey City Hous. Auth., 619 A.2d 575 (N.J. 1993). “§ 59:2-1, further states, courts should employ an analysis that first asks " whether an immunity applies and if not, should liability attach.”

Manna v. State, 609 A.2d 757 (N.J. 1992). “§ 59:2-1, unless liability is specified. Even when that liability exists, however, it may be subject to specific statutory immunities.”

Primo v. City of Bridgeton, 392 A.2d 1252 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 1978).

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.