A plaintiff unsuccessfully attempted to sue The College of New Jersey (“TCNJ”) in a defamation and slander lawsuit based upon alleged actions by one of its employees.
The case arose out of comments allegedly made by Defendant Tabitha Dell’Angelo about Plaintiff Timothy Daly at a February 13, 2024, Central Bucks Action Meeting and a February 25, 2024, Op-Ed on the Bucks County Beacon website. Plaintiff filed a Complaint in the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas of Pennsylvania alleging that Defendant Dell’Angelo made the comments within the course and scope of her employment with The College of New Jersey making TCNJ vicariously liable for Defendant Dell’Angelo’s actions by the doctrine of respondeat superior.
TCNJ, represented by Capehart & Scatchard, P.A., filed Preliminary Objections to Plaintiff’s Complaint, arguing that the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas lacked jurisdiction because TCNJ was entitled to sovereign immunity, as it was/is an arm of the State of New Jersey. TCNJ also argued that it was entitled to all the privileges and immunities of the New Jersey Tort Claims Act N.J.S.A. 59:1-1 et seq. As such, Plaintiff’s Complaint must be dismissed because Plaintiff failed to file a notice of tort claim pursuant to N.J.S.A. 59:8-8.
Sovereign immunity bars a suit against a state in another state absent consent. Simply put, a person cannot sue the State of New Jersey in a Pennsylvania state court absent consent by New Jersey. The question then turned to whether TCNJ was considered the “State of New Jersey” to invoke sovereign immunity.
In Marshall v. SEPTA, 300 A.3d 537 (Pa. Commw. 2023) the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania dismissed an action against New Jersey Transit in Pennsylvania based on sovereign immunity. The Marshall court held that New Jersey Transit was an arm of the State of New Jersey and cannot be sued in another state absent consent. The District of New Jersey has also held that The College of New Jersey is an arm of the State of New Jersey. See Messina v. Coll. of N.J., 624 F. Supp. 3d 523, 529 (D.N.J. 2022). These prior decisions support that the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas lacked jurisdiction over TCNJ.
TCNJ also argued that Plaintiff failed to file a notice of tort claim. N.J.S.A. 59:8-8 bars a claimant from instituting a claim unless the claimant provides notice to the public entity within 90 days of the accrual of the claim. N.J.S.A. 59:1-3 defines the State as a public entity. TCNJ additionally argued that pursuant to Flamer v. N.J. Transit Bus Operations, 414 Pa. Super. 350 (Pa. Super. 1992), Pennsylvania courts are required to apply the immunities and provisions of the New Jersey Tort Claims Act because they are not repugnant to Pennsylvania public policy. Therefore, it was found that Plaintiff was required to notify TCNJ of the potential claim within 90 days of February 13, 2024, and February 25, 2024. Plaintiff simply never filed a timely notice as required.
Ultimately, the Bucks County Court of Common Pleas sustained TCNJ’s Preliminary Objections and dismissed Plaintiff’s Complaint without prejudice and allowed Plaintiff 20 days to file an Amended Complaint. Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint renewing claims against Defendant Dell’Angelo, but did not bring any new or amended claims against TCNJ. This holding protected the rights of the State of New Jersey by reenforcing the doctrine of sovereign immunity.
Takeaway: Practitioners defending the State of New Jersey and connected public entities in civil matters in Pennsylvania should remain aware of the defenses under sovereign immunity to which the State of New Jersey is entitled; but care must be placed, and precedent should be cited, in arguing whether a public entity is considered the “State.” The NJ Tort Claims Act also provides the State of New Jersey with another layer of procedural protection and defense practitioners should remain aware of the State’s right to enforce stringent filing and timing requirements imposed upon plaintiffs and claimants.
