In Patrick Boyle v. Carol Huff (A-42-22) (087900) (Decided May 30, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that indemnification can exist in first-party claims; however, contracts must be drafted to expressly provide for such indemnification. “[I]ndemnification may also apply to first-party claims if that is the clear intent
In Goyco v. Progressive Insurance Company (A-12-23/088497) (Decided May 14, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that an operator of a low-speed electric scooter (LSES) is not a “pedestrian” entitled to personal injury protection (PIP) benefits under the New Jersey Automobile Reparation Reform Act, also known as the
In New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. B.P. (A-56-22/087676) (Decided May 21, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that a New Jersey woman did not abuse or neglect her newborn by leaving her at the hospital two days after giving birth and not returning to
In Savage v. Township of Neptune, (A-2-23/087229) (Decided May 7, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that N.J.S.A. 10:5-12.8(a), a section of the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD) that was enacted in the wake of the “#MeToo movement,” prohibits any “provision in any employment contract or settlement
In Usachenok v. State of New Jersey Department of the Treasury, (A-40-22/086861) (Decided May 6, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey struck down a regulation requiring State investigators to “request” that anyone interviewed “not discuss any aspect of the investigation with others” when investigating harassment and discrimination investigations in
In Comprehensive Neurosurgical, P.C. v. The Valley Hospital (A-52-22/087469) (Decided April 22, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey vacated a $24,300,000 jury verdict in favor of a group of eleven neurosurgeons who alleged that Valley Hospital did not deal with them fairly or act in good faith when it
In C.R. v. M.T. (A-47-22/087887) (Decided April 22, 2024), the Supreme Court of New Jersey clarified the showing required to obtain a final protective order under the Sexual Assault Survivor Protection Act of 2015 (SASPA). According to the Court, the plain language of N.J.S.A. 2C:14-16(a)(2)r creates a standard that is
The Supreme Court of New Jersey recently granted certification in Fuster v. Township of Chatham. The question before the justices is whether a body worn camera (BWC) video-recorded statement can be obtained under the State’s Open Public Records Acy (OPRA) or the common law right of access. Facts of the
