Nathan Conklin; Richard Conklin; Frank Conklin, III; Audrey Conklin

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division’s decision, granting the plaintiffs a new trial on the legal malpractice claim because the trial court’s jury charge on proximate cause was defective. The Court limited the retrial to the issue of attorney negligence, excluded plaintiffs’ comparative negligence, and rejected the use of objective and subjective informed‑consent standards, directing the jury to apply the ordinary negligence principles and a substantial‑factor test for proximate cause.