N.J. Stat. » Title 59 — CLAIMS AGAINST PUBLIC ENTITIES
New Jersey Statutes

N.J. Stat. § 59:4-7 (2026)

Weather conditions; effect on use of streets and highways--immunity

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section JustiaN.J. Stat. CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury caused solely by the effect on the use of streets and highways of weather conditions.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1992–2021 · 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 8× “§ 59:4-7; and (2) the immunity for dangerous conditions attributable to the plan or design of the public property, N.”
Bligen v. Jersey City Hous. Auth., 619 A.2d 575 (N.J. 1993). · cites it 6× “Plaintiff filed a complaint against JCHA seeking damages for the injuries she had sustained from her slip and fall.”
Luchejko v. City of Hoboken, 998 A.2d 506 (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2010). “” N.J.S.A 59:4-7. That immunity does not apply here because Luchejko’s injuries occurred on a sidewalk, not a street or highway and were “allegedly caused by a combination of the weather and other factors.”
Elena Mercado Vs. Donna L. Krimmel (l-0230-17, Atl. Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2021). · cites it 10× “She appeals from a summary judgment dismissing her complaint based on the weather immunity accorded public entities in N.J.S.A. 59:4-7, which provides that "[n]either a public entity nor a public employee is liable for an injury caused solely by the effect on the use of streets…”
Barbara Santopietro Vs. Borough of Union Beach Vs. Vollers Excavating & Constr. (l-0097-16, Monmouth Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). · cites it 4× “Plaintiffs further argue that N.J.S.A. 59:4-7 did not immunize the Borough against liability.”
Miriam L. Chicas Vs. Town of Kearny Jose a. Martinez Vs. Town of Kearny (l-2516-15 & L-4785-15, Hudson Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2019). · cites it 2× “In that regard, they contend that they are protected from liability A-1248-17T3 8 under (1) the weather condition immunity, N.J.S.A. 59:4-7; (2) the good-faith immunity, N.”
Adrianne Bruce Vs. Borough of Collingswood (l-1361-15, Camden Cnty. & Statewide) (N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. 2018). “Lastly, although defendant argued it was immune from any claim pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:4-7, the TCA's so-called "weather immunity," the judge admittedly "punted" on the issue and never decided it.”
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.