Find Supreme Court appeal cases here. The most recent cases are listed first. You can also use the search tool to find a specific case.
APPEALS ADDED IN THE NEW JERSEY SUPREME COURT LISTED NEWEST TO OLDEST
The following statements of issues on appeal are prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. They have been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interest of brevity, some issues may not have been summarized.
Beginning on July 16, 2010, each appeal summary posted on this website includes its "posted" date, which is necessary for calculating certain due dates for filing briefs and motions under revised Rule 1:13-9, "Amicus Curiae."
In addition, website addresses cited in the Court's opinions may change or disappear over time. An attempt has been made to capture the material cited in an opinion and to provide links to those sources, when available.
|
A-30-14 Ramon Cuevas v. Wentworth Group (075077) Did the trial court err in denying defendants’ request for remittitur under the circumstances presented?
Watch the
|
|
A-29-14 State v. Lee Funderburg (074760) In the context of this jury trial for first-degree attempted murder, should the trial judge have charged the jury, sua sponte, on the lesser-included offense of attempted passion/provocation manslaughter?
Watch the
|
|
A-28-14 Christina Silviera-Francisco v. Board of Education of Elizabeth (074974) Did the Appellate Division err in determining that, in appealing a decision of the Commissioner of Education, the Board of Education was precluded from challenging a prior decision of the Commissioner that had remanded the matter to the Administrative Law Judge?
Watch the
|
|
A-27-14 Sergio Rodriguez v. Raymours Furniture (074603) Could the employer enforce a contractual provision in an employment application, by which the employee waived the two-year statute of limitations applicable to claims against the employer and shortened the period for such claims to six months?
Watch the
|
|
A-26-14 State v. Robert J. Stein (074466) Did the State improperly deny the defendant discovery to contest the charge of driving while intoxicated?
Watch the
|
|
A-25-14 Patricia Del Vecchio v. Township of Bridgewater (074936) In this action alleging that the defendant-employer failed to provide a reasonable accommodation for the plaintiff-employee’s disability in violation of the Law Against Discrimination, did the trial court improperly limit the testimony of the employee’s treating physicians regarding her medical condition?
Watch the
|
|
A-24-14 State v. Hector Feliciano (074395) Does the roving warrant provision of the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-9(g), which allows the police to wiretap telephones not identified in the warrant application on a showing that the target has purposefully attempted to thwart interception by changing telephones, violate the particularity requirements of the New Jersey and federal constitutions?
Watch the
|
|
A-23-14 State v. Chad Bivins (074374) Under the circumstances presented, was defendant sufficiently connected to the “property and investigation" to authorize police to detain and search him based on a valid warrant to search the property?
Watch the
|
|
A-22-14 State v. James Buckner (074390) Does N.J.S.A. 43:6A-13(b), which authorizes the recall of retired judges for temporary service, violate provisions of the New Jersey State Constitution?
Watch the
|
|
A-21-14 State v. Antoine D. Watts (074556) Was this drug evidence properly suppressed where an initial search, conducted pursuant to a search warrant, did not reveal drug evidence, but defendant was taken into custody and the drugs were later discovered while defendant was being transferred to another location?
Watch the
|
|
A-20-14 State v. Robert Goodwin (074352) Could defendant be convicted of violating the insurance fraud statute, N.J.S.A. 2C:21-4.6a, under the circumstances presented?
Watch the
|
|
A-19-14 Robert Smith v. Millville Rescue Squad (074685) Does the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, which prohibits discrimination based upon “marital status," bar an employer from discharging an employee because of the anticipated effect of an employee’s imminent divorce on the workplace?
Watch the
|
|
A-18-14 Templo Fuente Da Vida Corp. v. National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh (074572) Did the plaintiff-insured provide notice to the defendant-insurer of the claim for coverage “as soon as practicable" under the circumstances; and, if not, was the defendant-insured required to show that it was prejudiced by the late notice to avoid coverage?
Watch the
|
|
A-17-14 New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. M.C. (074410) Where an abuse and neglect action is based upon allegations of imminent risk resulting from a caretaker’s failure to exercise a minimum degree of care, should the court assess the risk to the child at the time of the caretaker’s action or inaction, or at the time of the fact-finding hearing?
|
|
A-16-14 Innes v. Marzano-Lesnevich (074291) Could these attorney-defendants be held liable for attorneys’ fees as consequential damages to a non-client under Saffer v. Willoughby, 20143 N.J. 256 (1996)?
Watch the
|
|
A-15-14 State v. David Bueso (074261) In the context of this sexual assault case, did the trial judge insufficiently inquire into the child-victim’s competency to testify, and, if so, did that oversight constitute plain error requiring a new trial?
Watch the
|
|
A-14-14 State v. Yasin Simms (074209) Did the assumed facts of a hypothetical posed to the prosecutor’s drug expert invade the jury’s province of deciding the ultimate issues?
Watch the
|
|
A-13-14 State v. Demetrius C. Cope (074206) Were police justified in conducting a protective sweep of defendant’s apartment under the circumstances?
Watch the
|
|
A-12-14 State v. Robert McNaught (072581) Did defendant’s attorney have a conflict of interest that deprived defendant of the effective assistance of counsel?
Watch the
|
|
A-10/11-14 Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. K.N. & K.E. (074161) Did the trial court infringe on DCPP’s placement and licensing authority in the context of this case involving child placement and home licensing under Title Nine (N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21 to -8.73), Title Thirty (N.J.S.A. 30:4C-11 to -2014), and the Resource Family Parent Licensing Act (N.J.S.A. 30:4C-27.3 to -27.2015)?
Watch the
|