In Players Place II Condominium Association, Inc. v. K.P. (A-60/61-22/088139) (Decided March 15, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey established a test to govern housing requests for emotional support animals, finding that they should be treated differently than pets. Under the Court’s new framework, individuals who seek an accommodation
In State v. Shlawrence Ross (A-34-22/087823) (Decided March 5, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that prosecutors could obtain a bullet extracted from the defendant’s body via surgical procedure pursuant to a search warrant. According to the Court, the proper analysis for determining whether the State can obtain
The Supreme Court of New Jersey recently took the first step in regulating how attorneys use artificial intelligence (AI). The key message from the state’s highest court is that while AI technology may revolutionize the legal industry, the old rules governing attorney ethics still apply. In September, the New Jersey
In Sanjuan v. School District of West New York (A-45-22/087515) (Decided February 12, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey clarified an arbitrator’s authority under the Tenure Employees Hearing Law. According to the court, the statute provides the basis to refer a case to arbitration but does not limit an
In State v. Curtis L. Gartrell (A-31-22/087597) (Decided January 17, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a defendant who left a suitcase behind when fleeing police did not have standing to challenge law enforcement’s warrantless search of the bag. Facts of State v. Gartell During the evening
In AC Ocean Walk v. American Guarantee and Liability Insurance, (A-28-22/087304) (Decided January 24, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the presence of the COVID-19 virus did not constitute the kind of “direct physical loss or damage” required to support a business-interruption insurance claim. Facts of AC
In State v. Calvin Fair (A-20-22/086617) (Decided January 16, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey incorporated the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Counterman v. Colorado, 600 U.S. 66, 79 (2023) to hold that a mental state of recklessness is constitutionally sufficient for a “true threats” prosecution under N.J.S.A.
In DeSimone v. Springpoint Senior Living, Inc. (A-37-22/087891) (Decided January 10, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the refund provision set forth in N.J.S.A. 56:8-2.11 does not provide relief for all Consumer Fraud Act (CFA) violations. Rather, it is limited solely to the food-related misrepresentations expressly proscribed
