Justin T. Quinn

U.S. District Court for the District of New Jersey magistrate 17 signed orders read

How Judge Quinn decides

Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.

What persuades

On motions to depose or subpoena a government official, this judge does not apply the Morgan doctrine as a blanket shield -- he works through the five Buono factors (necessity, first-hand knowledge, essentiality, interference with duties, availability elsewhere) and has ruled both ways within months of each other: a small-town mayor's deposition was compelled where he had unique first-hand knowledge, while a state agency's chief administrator was protected where no such personal involvement was shown.

“Doing the same here, the Court finds that the Mayor did have personal involvement in underlying events and, therefore, has knowledge relevant to this case.”

On broad, poorly-targeted third-party discovery, he scrutinizes both relevance and burden closely and will grant a protective order sua sponte in the movant's favor even when the movant's own standing to seek one is doubtful.

“It is the Court’s duty to prevent efforts to obtain irrelevant and unduly burdensome discovery, which is exactly what is at issue in the instant motions.”

Procedural preferences

He enforces the District's Local Civil Rule 37.1 meet-and-confer requirement as a substantive standard, not a box-checking exercise, and will note a violation on the record even when he does not use it to dispose of the motion.

“This is not simply a box-checking exercise; the Parties are required to engage in robust, meaningful discussions with the intention of resolving the disputed issues without the intervention of the Court.”

On fee applications, block billing is scrutinized line by line; vague, combined task descriptions that make it impossible to allocate time will cost the applicant, not the court.

“the Court is unable to make a reasonable determination regarding much of counsel’s time... the undersigned cannot 'determine if the hours claimed are unreasonable.'”

Cautions

Motions for reconsideration face a high bar: reargument of previously-rejected points and after-the-fact expert reports obtained without explanation for the earlier delay will not qualify as grounds for reconsideration.

“a motion seeking reconsideration may not be used by a party to 'restate arguments that the court has already considered.'”

In a case management/scheduling role, he sets firm discovery deadlines with explicit no-further-extensions language and administratively terminates cases pending settlement rather than leaving them open indefinitely.

“The request to extend fact discovery by 60 days is granted. Fact discovery shall conclude by January 6, 2025. No further extensions of fact discovery will be granted.”

Signed rulings

A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.

In re Application of RH2 Participacoes Societarias LTDA Under 28 U.S.C. Section 1782
3:23-cv-04025-GC-JTQ · 2024-07-31
Motion to quash (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED that Respondents’ motion to quash [ECF No. 7] is DENIED”

Khal Anshei Tallymawr Inc. v. Township of Toms River
3:21-cv-02716-RK-JTQ (lead); 3:21-cv-03239-ZNQ-JTQ (member) · 2024-08-08
Motion to quash (defendant) Granted

“the Court will enter a protective Order, preventing Plaintiffs from obtaining the information sought in the 19 Subpoenas.”

Price v. County of Salem
3:22-cv-06042-MAS-JTQ · 2024-09-30
Motion for reconsideration (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Motion for Reconsideration (ECF No. 109) is DENIED”

BFI Waste Systems of New Jersey, Inc. v. Township of Monroe
3:23-cv-00059-RK-JTQ · 2025-01-24
Motions to compel (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion to compel [ECF No. 43] is GRANTED.”

New York SMSA Limited Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless v. The Borough of Spring Lake
3:24-cv-10378-RK-JTQ · 2025-05-30
Motion to intervene (third_party) Granted

“ORDERED that the motion to intervene [ECF No. 17] is GRANTED”

Curtis v. New Jersey State Police
3:19-cv-21164-GC-JTQ · 2025-09-26
Motions to dismiss (defendant) Granted

“RECOMMENDED that Plaintiff’s Complaint be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE”

A.T. and O.T. v. Freehold Regional High School District Board of Education
3:24-cv-00822-ZNQ-JTQ · 2026-03-20
Motion to compel ime (defendant) Denied

“ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion to Compel an Independent Medical Examination of A.T. (ECF Nos. 54, 62) is DENIED without prejudice”

Motions to compel (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that Defendant’s Motions to Compel Medical Records (ECF Nos. 54, 62) is GRANTED”

American Classics of Lakewood, LLC v. Buchanan
3:22-cv-05382-GC-JTQ · 2025-11-19
Motion to quash (defendant) Granted

“ORDERED that the Third Parties’ Motion to Quash (ECF No. 61) is GRANTED”

Motions to compel (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ Cross-Motion to Compel (ECF No. 73) is DENIED”

Motion to disqualify counsel (plaintiff) Denied

“Plaintiffs’ thin cross-motion is denied.”

Khal Anshei Tallymawr Inc. v. Township of Toms River
3:21-cv-02716-RK-JTQ (lead); 3:21-cv-03239-ZNQ-JTQ (member) · 2026-03-20
Motion for attorney fees (plaintiff) Granted in part

“ORDERED that an award of attorneys’ fees in the amount of $29,750.00 is granted to Plaintiffs”

Khetani v. Plainsboro Township
3:23-cv-00534-GC-JTQ · 2024-08-19
Motion to amend (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion for leave to amend the Complaint [ECF No. 30] is DENIED”

Veritas Recovery Center, LLC v. City of South Amboy
3:23-cv-02420-ZNQ-JTQ · 2025-12-03
Motion to amend (plaintiff) Granted

“ORDERED that the Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend the Complaint (ECF No. 55) is GRANTED”

Jones v. New Jersey Department of Corrections Central Transportation
3:18-cv-01454-RK-JTQ · 2025-04-23
Motion for miscellaneous relief (plaintiff) Denied

“ORDERED that Plaintiff’s Motion to Approve his Application for Pre-Approval of Pro Bono Services [ECF No. 194] is DENIED”

Put Judge Quinn's record to work

Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Quinn actually rules, not a generic AI guess.

Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Quinn's own signed orders and cites them.