In Haviland v. Lourdes Medical Center of Burlington County, Inc., (A-70-20/085419)(Decided April 12, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that plaintiffs are not required to serve an Affidavit of Merit (AOM) against defendant health care facilities for claims of vicarious liability arising from the negligent conduct of an
Now that adult-use cannabis sales have begun in New Jersey, many municipalities and their employees are raising questions about when off-duty cannabis use is permitted. One of the most controversial issues involves off-duty cannabis use by law enforcement. While the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act protects workers
On April 13, 2022, the Attorney General issued a memorandum to law enforcement agencies authorizing off-duty cannabis use under the Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Marketplace Modernization Act. Given the sudden and extreme departure from the norm, the memorandum was met with a broad variety of reactions. Some expressed support,
In State v. Michael A. Konecny (A-21-20/084880) (Decided April 5, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held a previous uncounseled conviction for driving while intoxicated (DWI) can’t be used to enhance a sentencing scheme for subsequent DWI convictions. The court further holds that a conviction vacated through post-conviction relief
In Acoli v. New Jersey State Parole Board (A-73-20/083980) (Decided May 10, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey granted parole to Sundiata Acoli, a former member of the Black Liberation Army who was convicted in the 1973 shooting death of a New Jersey state trooper, Werner Foerster. The court
In State v. O.D.A.-C. (A-78-20/085608) (Decided May 2, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that because a detective repeatedly contradicted and minimized the significance of the Miranda warnings, the State could not shoulder its heavy burden of proving the defendant’s waiver was voluntary. Facts of State v. O.D.A.-C.
In Graphnet, Inc. v. Retarus, Inc. (A-71-20/085529) (Decided February 11, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey ruled that a new trial on damages was required after the jury received confusing instructions on the purpose of nominal damages by stating in the same instructions that nominal damages compensate a plaintiff
In Kathleen M. Moynihan v. Edward J. Lynch (A-64-20/085157) (Decided March 8, 2022), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that N.J.S.A. 25:1-5(h)’s provision compelling parties to seek the advice of counsel — and therefore retain counsel — before signing a palimony agreement violates the substantive due process guarantee of
