Supreme Court of New Jersey

The Court held that New Jersey lacks specific personal jurisdiction over the national organization because the plaintiffs' abuse claims do not arise out of or relate to any affirmative act that the organization took in or directed toward New Jersey.

The Court held that Myers must be allowed to withdraw his felony-murder guilty plea because he entered a single global plea agreement that expressly preserved his right to appeal the suppression ruling, prevailed on that appeal, and thereby lost evidence that had also been used against him in the felony-murder case.

The Court held that Daniel’s Law imposes no mental-state requirement for actual-damages liability under N.J.S.A. 56:8-166.1(c)(1). It reached that conclusion from the statute’s text, the Legislature’s express inclusion of mental-state requirements elsewhere, and the deletion of negligence-like language in a later…

The Supreme Court of New Jersey resolved a question of first impression, holding that neither the Eminent Domain Act nor the Local Lands and Buildings Law requires a municipality to specify the particular public use for a taking within the ordinance authorizing condemnation.

The New Jersey Supreme Court held that N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.1(f), which bars commercial automobile liability policies from providing an employee less uninsured/underinsured motorist coverage than the named insured, does not require UM coverage for employees up to the policy's third-party general liability limit; the…

Writing for a unanimous Court, Justice Patterson answered two certified questions from the Third Circuit concerning N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.1(f), which governs uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage in commercial motor vehicle policies naming a corporate or business entity as the named insured.

The Court held that an arbitrator's award requiring East Orange custodial employees to receive one and one-half times their salary in addition to regular pay for working during COVID-19 school closures directly contradicted N.J.S.A.

The New Jersey Supreme Court held that the Child Victims Act's removal of the Child Sexual Abuse Act's 'within the household' requirement for passive abuser liability is a substantive amendment that applies only prospectively, to acts of sexual abuse committed on or after December 1, 2019.

The Court held that expert testimony is required before a defendant may invoke diminished capacity or receive a corresponding jury instruction. Because Mustafa presented only lay evidence of unusual behavior and substance use, without evidence identifying a mental disease or defect or linking such a condition to his…

The Court held that a defendant must present qualified expert testimony to assert New Jersey’s insanity defense because diagnosing a mental disease and determining its effect on the defendant’s reasoning at the time of the offense are beyond the common experience of jurors.

The Court held that salting a minimally accumulated snow and ice condition during an ongoing storm did not constitute the unusual circumstances required to impose a duty on a commercial landowner before the storm ended.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the materiality standard for Brady claims is distinct from the Carter standard for newly discovered evidence, and affirmed the Appellate Division’s judgment because the defendant failed to meet the Brady materiality requirement.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Noriega, held that a State witness's payment of a criminal defendant's legal fees creates neither a per se nor an actual conflict of interest, and affirmed the denial of Kearney's post-conviction-relief petition alleging ineffective assistance of…

The Court affirmed the Appellate Division’s judgment holding that insurance-fraud claims under the Fraud Act and RICO are not subject to PIP arbitration under AICRA. The Court adopted the Appellate Division’s reasoning that the specialized PIP arbitration process is designed for limited benefit-payment disputes and…

The Court held that Jackson Township could not condemn privately owned lots solely to transfer them to a developer in exchange for different land that would be used as open space.

The Court held that the 2023 amendment allowing the Attorney General to oppose application of the False Claims Act’s public disclosure bar without intervening is procedural and applies to steps taken after its effective date in pending cases.

The Court held that insurance brokers, producers, and agents are not exempt from liability under the Consumer Fraud Act through a judicially created learned-professional or semi-professional exception.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Pierre-Louis, reversed the Appellate Division and held that defendant Wildgoose's PCR claims attacking the Attorney General's Jessica Lunsford Act plea-negotiation Guidelines are procedurally barred under Rule 3:22-4(a) because he could have raised…

The Court held that the 1997 amendment to the Municipal Land Use Law requires applicants seeking use variances for inherently beneficial uses to make a specific showing that the variance will not substantially impair the zoning plan and zoning ordinance.

The New Jersey Supreme Court held that the trial judge correctly applied the heightened discovery standard of State v. Chambers in granting a limited in camera review of the alleged sexual assault victim's pre-incident mental health records, reversing the Appellate Division's contrary judgment.

The Court held that the Consumer Finance Licensing Act does not create an implied private right of action allowing a borrower to affirmatively void a loan contract based on an alleged licensing violation.

The Court held that the Council on Local Mandates is subject to judicial review when the question is whether it acted within the constitutional and statutory scope of its authority.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the paramedics who rendered advanced life support to Jeremy Almonte are immune from civil liability under N.J.S.A. 26:2K-14 because they maintained direct voice communication with, and took orders from, a licensed physician as required by the Emergency Medical Services Act.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division’s grant of a new trial to Nirav Patel, holding that the newly discovered franchise agreements were discoverable with reasonable diligence and therefore did not satisfy the second prong of the Carter test. The Court remanded for sentencing.

The Court held that expert testimony supporting the defense theory that the victim died from palliative care rather than crash injuries is relevant to causation under the first prong of N.J.S.A. 2C:2-3(c), even if it does not dispute but-for causation. It also held that an N.J.R.E.

The Court held that the policy’s capacity exclusion bars coverage for the underlying claims because the allegations involved Krivulka’s conduct in capacities with entities Berkley did not insure, and the exclusion does not require proof of a causal nexus.

The Court held that N.J.S.A. 39:6A-12 applies to PIP benefits provided through the UCJF and bars evidence of future medical expenses that remain within the claimant’s available PIP limits.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the Tidelands Act’s plain language permits the Tidelands Resource Council to set or modify pierhead lines when reviewing individual tidelands license applications, rather than requiring a uniform, prospective mapping of pierhead lines around all islands, and affirmed the…

The Court held that the Child Victims Act does not categorically bar public-school vicarious-liability claims for employee sexual abuse merely because the abuse occurred outside the scope of employment, and it established a fact-specific standard for those claims.

The Court denied emergent relief and directed that jury selection and trial proceed with the panel summoned before the Governor issued the clemency order. It concluded that the defendant had not established a fair-cross-section violation because the record did not show a constitutionally cognizable group, substantial…

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the Heck favorable‑termination rule applies to civil‑rights claims brought under the New Jersey Civil Rights Act and the Tort Claims Act, so Counts One, Two, and Three accrued on June 1, 2020 and were timely, while Count Four (false arrest/imprisonment) accrued earlier and was…

The Court formally adopted the Restatement’s two-part framework for determining when an attorney owes a duty of care to a non-client. Applying that framework, it held that the attorney owed Helen no duty because she neither relied on nor was invited to rely on his legal services, and the evidence could not clearly and…

The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division’s vacatur of Michael Owens’s murder conviction, reinstated his murder and firearm convictions, and remanded for sentencing, holding that a sua sponte instruction on passion/provocation manslaughter is required only when the record “jumps off the page” and…

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division’s judgment that a teacher qualifies as an essential employee for workers’ compensation purposes, and held that the summary decision without an affidavit was proper because the motion relied on public documents, not facts not of record.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division, holding that the State Board of Examiners may impose a two‑year suspension of a teacher’s certificate even after an arbitrator imposed a three‑month suspension, because the doctrines of res judicata and collateral estoppel do not apply, there is no…

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the warrantless seizure of a security camera DVR from an attached garage during an active house fire was justified by exigent circumstances, reversing the trial court’s suppression order and remanding for further proceedings.

The Court affirmed the Appellate Division’s judgment, holding that the statutory process for filling a vacancy in a primary nomination applied after the trial court set aside the primary results.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey denied Judge Wilfredo Benitez’s motion for reconsideration and ordered that his disqualification from hearing DWI matters remain indefinite, finding his conduct and misrepresentations warrant continued sanction.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that false‑light invasion of privacy claims are governed by the one‑year statute of limitations applicable to defamation actions, affirming the Appellate Division’s dismissal of the plaintiff’s claim.

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(j) creates a distinct first‑degree substantive offense and is not subject to the mandatory parole‑ineligibility provisions of the Graves Act.