In Richter v. Oakland Board of Education (A-23-19/083273) (Decided June 8, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that an adverse employment action is not a required element for a failure-to-accommodate claim under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD). Facts of Richter v. Oakland Board of Education Plaintiff
In Baffi Simmons v. Wendy Mercado (A-18-20/084695) (Decided June 17, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey ordered the City of Millville to comply with an Open Public Records Act (OPRA) request for complaint-summonses, known as CDR-1s. The court held that while the Judiciary may have created the template for
The New Jersey Supreme Court has brought much-needed clarity to an issue that has plagued landlords — are they obligated to clear snow and ice while precipitation is still falling? In Angel Alberto Pareja v. Princeton International Properties (A-4-20/084394) (Decided June 10, 2021), the court adopted the ongoing storm rule,
In-person jury trials will resume on June 15, 2021, under a new order by the Supreme Court of New Jersey. The order comes as COVID-19 cases continue to fall across the state, allowing court operations to gradually resume. In-Person Criminal Trials The New Jersey Supreme Court’s Order, dated May 11,
In State v. Leo T. Little, Jr. (A-80-19/084115) (Decided May 27, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that voir dire questioning by the trial court of prospective jurors during jury selection deprived the defendant of a fair trial. Facts of State v. Little, Jr. According to trial testimony,
In State v. Edgar Torres (A-52-19/083676) (Decided May 11, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey held that an explicit statement, explaining the overall fairness of a sentence imposed for multiple offenses in a single proceeding or in multiple sentencing proceedings, is essential to a proper sentencing assessment under State
In State v. Kanem Williamson (A-65-19/083979) (Decided May 10, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed that the trial court correctly admitted the victim’s statement identifying defendant as her shooter as a dying declaration under N.J.R.E. 804(b)(2). The court further held that the admission of the victim’s statement as
In Baskin v. P.C. Richard & Son, LLC (A-77-19/(084257) (Decided May 5, 2021), the Supreme Court of New Jersey clarified the requirements for maintaining a class-action lawsuit. Applying these standards, it held that the plaintiffs sufficiently pled a class action against defendants for noncompliance with the Fair and Accurate Credit
