NEWARK, NJ – A federal judge has denied a New Jersey man’s attempt to reopen his dismissed lawsuit against several Hopatcong officials and agencies, rejecting his motions for recusal, venue change, and reconsideration — and ordering him to pay nearly $10,000 in legal fees to one of the defendants.
In a decision issued January 16, 2026, U.S. District Judge Brian R. Martinotti dismissed all pending motions filed by pro se plaintiff Thomas I. Gage in Gage v. Borough of Hopatcong et al., Civil No. 2:25-cv-3696 (BRM)(SDA). The court’s ruling leaves intact its prior order dismissing the case with prejudice and denying Gage’s request for default judgment against the borough.
Gage’s original complaint named as defendants the Borough of Hopatcong, Municipal Court Judge Peter A. Fico, Borough Engineer John K. Ruschke, Borough employee William Donegan, and two joint insurance funds — the Morris County Municipal Joint Insurance Fund and the Municipal Excess Joint Insurance Fund. He alleged a wide range of misconduct relating to local government decisions, engineering actions, and court proceedings, but the court previously found his claims legally insufficient under Rule 12(b)(6).
In October 2025, after his lawsuit was dismissed, Gage filed a sprawling “Motion to Vacate Judgment,” asking the court to recuse itself, transfer the case to another venue, and reconsider its earlier decision. He also filed additional “More Legal Action” submissions and a separate motion requesting more time to file an appeal.
Judge Martinotti rejected each of these requests, ruling that Gage had not met the legal standards for any of the relief sought. The court found no evidence of judicial bias or personal interest that would warrant recusal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 144 or 455, noting that Gage’s dissatisfaction with the court’s rulings “does not establish grounds for disqualification.”
His motion to transfer venue under 28 U.S.C. § 1404(a) was also denied, with the judge concluding that Gage had not shown that a different district would be more appropriate or that any procedural error had occurred. Likewise, his request for reconsideration under Local Civil Rule 7.1(i) was rejected because it failed to present new evidence, a change in law, or clear error in the prior decision.
The court further ruled that Gage’s motion to extend his appeal deadline was moot in light of the case’s final disposition.
Separately, Judge Martinotti granted defendant John K. Ruschke’s request for attorneys’ fees and costs, ordering Gage to pay $9,718.50. The decision cited prior findings that Gage’s litigation conduct had imposed unnecessary expenses on the defendants, noting that Ruschke’s application for fees was reasonable and properly supported.
The opinion also confirmed that Gage had attempted to refile his motion for default judgment against the Borough of Hopatcong, despite the court’s previous ruling that the borough had timely filed its answer. The judge declined to consider the duplicate filing, calling it “identical in substance” to the prior motion.
The order ends Gage’s latest round of filings in a case that has seen multiple motions and re-submissions since mid-2025. Unless successfully appealed, the ruling finalizes dismissal of his lawsuit and enforces the nearly $10,000 fee award.
A New Jersey federal judge denied Thomas Gage’s motions to reopen his Hopatcong lawsuit and ordered him to pay $9,718 in attorney fees to a borough engineer he had sued.
