New Jersey Statutes
N.J. Stat. § 59:3-3 (2026)
Execution or enforcement of laws
✓ current as of May 2026
A public employee is not liable if he acts in good faith in the execution or enforcement of any law. Nothing in this section exonerates a public employee from liability for false arrest or false imprisonment.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 113
cases (52 in the last 5 years), 1985–2026 · leading case: Lee v. Brown, 178 A.3d 701 (N.J. 2018).
Lee v. Brown, 178 A.3d 701 (N.J. 2018). “**118 In this case the Court is tasked with determining whether an electrical inspector is entitled to qualified immunity under N.J.S.A. 59:3-3, or absolute immunity under N.”
Trafton v. City of Woodbury, 799 F. Supp. 2d 417 (D.N.J. 2011). “Defendant Holmstrom contends summary judgment should be entered on his behalf because he is entitled to good faith immunity under two provisions of the New Jersey Tort Claims Act (hereinafter “NJTCA”).”
N.E., as Legal Guardian for Infant J v. v. State of, 156 A.3d 44 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2017). “The trial judge rejected defendants' application as a matter of law and instructed the jury to consider the good faith immunity of N.J.S.A. 59:3-3 only with respect to certain aspects of the investigation.”
Doe v. Div. of Youth & Fam. Servs., 148 F. Supp. 2d 462 (D.N.J. 2001). “See N.J. Stat. Ann. § 59:3-3 . The Act further provides that it does not exonerate a public employee from liability if it is established that the employee was acting outside the scope of his or her employment, or the employee’s conduct rose to the level of a crime, fraud, actual…”
Adams v. City of Camden, 461 F. Supp. 2d 263 (D.N.J. 2006). “§ 59:2 -2b, and in general the employee is not liable when acting in good faith, N.J. Stat. Ann. § 59:3-3 , this good faith immunity does not apply to claims for false arrest or imprisonment: A public employee is not liable if he acts in good faith in the execution or…”
O'BRIEN v. Borough of Woodbury Heights, 679 F. Supp. 429 (D.N.J. 1988). “That provision states, “[a] public employee is not liable for any injury resulting from the exercise of judgment, or discretion vested in him.”
Mantz v. Chain, 239 F. Supp. 2d 486 (D.N.J. 2002). “Under the TCA, a public employee is generally “liable for injury caused by his act or omission to the same extent as a private person.”
Tofano v. Reidel, 61 F. Supp. 2d 289 (D.N.J. 1999). “N.J.S.A. § 59:3-3 (1992). The Supreme Court of New Jersey has stated that “[a]dopting the analysis used in federal civil rights cases, our courts have ruled that to obtain summary judgment [on good faith immunity under N.”
Danny Caicedo v. Fabian Caicedo, 110 A.3d 969 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2015). “Pertinent to this appeal, N.J.S.A. 59:3-3 specifically provides that "[a] 9 A-6163-12T2 public employee is not liable if he [or she] acts in good faith in the execution or enforcement of any law.”
Usavage v. Port Auth., 932 F. Supp. 2d 575 (S.D.N.Y. 2013). “See N.J.S.A. 59:3-3. “The ‘objective reasonableness’ standard that is used to determine whether a defendant enjoys qualified immunity from actions brought pursuant to 42 U.”
Rosario v. City of Union City Police Dep't, 131 F. App'x 785 (3rd Cir. 2005). “First, they argue the District Court erred as a matter of law when it declined to grant good faith immunity to defendants under N.J.S.A. 59:3-3. Second, defendants claim the District Court erred in excluding from evidence the officers’ arrest warrant for Garcia and testimony…”
Hill v. Algor, 85 F. Supp. 2d 391 (D.N.J. 2000). “Meyer argues that he enjoys immunity from Hill’s state law claims pursuant to the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, specifically N.J.S.A. 59:3-3. See Defs.’ Br. at 38. This statute provides that “[a] public employee is not liable if he acts in good faith in the execution or…”
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.