This page provides summaries of Supreme Court appeals, along with certain procedural information, due dates, and publicly filed briefs. 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
Summaries for Informational Purposes Only: 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.
Party Briefing and Case Documents: Briefing on appeals before the Supreme Court is governed by Court Rule. The Court’s order taking the appeal typically will include the due dates for the parties’ merits briefs and for amicus motions and briefs. The order is included in the “Case Document(s)” for each appeal. If the appeal is not sealed, the parties’ briefs also will be included in the “Case Document(s).”
Amicus Motions: Beginning on Feb. 10, 2026, motions for leave to appear as amicus curiae and proposed amicus briefs in Supreme Court appeals are due ten (10) days after the respondent files its merits brief, and motions to extend or relax the time for filing an amicus motion and brief will not be accepted. See R. 1:13-9(e).
|
A-12-25 James G. Lowe, M.D. v. Bernard Audet (090940) Read Appellate Opinion A-4093-23 Are insurance brokers exempt from liability under the “learned professionals” exception to the Consumer Fraud Act?
|
|
A-11-25 Erwin Campoverde v. NY-NJ Link Developer, LLC (090537) Read Appellate Opinion A-1174-23 What is the applicable standard under New Jersey law for determining whether a general contractor owes a duty to a subcontractor’s employees for the purpose of determining liability for the injuries sustained by a subcontractor’s employee?
|
|
S-10-25 Cynthia Johnson v. Denise Wilkerson, et al. (091201) In this matter, in which the trial court granted a petition for an election contest and invalidated the results of the Democratic primary election for a council seat in the Borough of Roselle, the Court determines that neither of the remedies advanced by defendant find support in the election law statutory scheme, and affirms the judgment that the candidate should be selected by the party committee under N.J.S.A. 19:13-20.
|
|
A-10-25 Nicky Travieso v. Ciara Crespo (091127) With respect to a “motor vehicle liability policy . . . that names a corporate or business entity as a named insured” under N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.1(f), what is the “maximum uninsured . . . motorist coverage available under the policy” that must be provided to “an individual employed by the corporate or business entity”?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-10-25
|
|
A-9-25 Craig Chiaccheri v. Zurich American Insurance Company (090943) With respect to a “motor vehicle liability policy . . . that names a corporate or business entity as a named insured” under N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.1(f), what is the “maximum . . . underinsured motorist coverage available under the policy” that must be provided to “an individual employed by the corporate or business entity”; and are endorsements limiting underinsured motorist coverage to an amount less than the general third-party liability coverage limit under the same policy in violation of N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.1(f) or otherwise contrary to public policy?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-9-25
|
|
A-8-25 Atlas Data Privacy Corp. v. We Inform, LLC, et al., (091145) What mental state, if any, is required to establish liability under Daniel’s Law, N.J.S.A. 56:8-166.1?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-8-25
|
|
A-7-25 State v. Yusef B. Allen (090853) Read Appellate Opinion A-1045-22 Is the materiality standard for a claim that the prosecutor failed to disclose evidence under Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), the same as the materiality standard for a claim of newly discovered evidence under State v. Carter, 91 N.J. 86 (1982), and does defendant satisfy the Brady materiality standard in this matter?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-7-25
|
|
A-6-25 State v. French G. Lee (090662) Read Appellate Opinion A-3125-22 Should there have been a N.J.R.E. 104 hearing on defendant’s challenge to the reliability of the State’s expert fingerprint evidence, should the potential jurors have been asked their opinions about the reliability of fingerprint evidence during voir dire, and did two of the State’s witnesses give improper testimony that the same person was depicted in both surveillance videos?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-6-25
|
|
A-5-25 State v. R.F.P. (090566) Read Appellate Opinion A-0276-24 Did defendant satisfy his burden of establishing that the alleged sexual assault victim’s pre-incident mental health records should be produced for the trial court’s in camera review, see State v. Chambers, 252 N.J. 561 (2023)?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-5-25 Part 1
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-5-25 Part 2
|
|
A-4-25 State v. Jamar J. Myers (090743) Read Appellate Opinion A-2045-22 Where defendant entered a global agreement and pled guilty to felony murder for one incident and to robbery for a separate incident, then successfully challenged his robbery conviction on appeal, can defendant withdraw his guilty plea to felony murder?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-4-25
|
|
A-3-25 Township of Jackson v. Getzel Bee, LLC; Township of Jackson v. Bellevue Jackson, LLC (090404) Read Appellate Opinion A-0590-23/A-0594-23 Does the particular parcel of land to be acquired by a municipality through eminent domain have to be put to public use, or may it be exchanged for other land that will serve that purpose?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-3-25 Part 1
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-3-25 Part 2
|
|
A-2-25 Borough of Seaside Park v. Shree Jyoti, LLC (089599) Read Appellate Opinion A-1915-22 Is the ordinance that authorizes a municipality to acquire property through its eminent domain power under the Local Land and Buildings Law, N.J.S.A. 40A:12-5(a), required to set forth the specific public purpose for which the property is being acquired?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-2-25
|
|
A-1-25 State v. Paul J. Caneiro (091055) Under the circumstances presented, where defendant’s house was on fire, was the warrantless seizure of evidence from the garage justified under the exigent circumstances exception to the warrant requirement?
Note: The Court imposed an expedited, peremptory briefing schedule in this matter. Any motion for leave to appear as amicus curiae shall be served and filed through eCourts Supreme, with the proposed amicus brief, on or before 9/24/25. For information about submitting an amicus filing, please call the Clerk’s Office at 609-815-2955. No further submissions will be accepted unless requested by the Court.
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-1-25
|
|
A-80/61-24 State v. Arthur F. Wildgoose (089853) Read Appellate Opinion A-1497-22 If the prosecutor makes the first plea offer in a Jessica Lunsford Act case after the defendant is indicted, does the prosecutor’s statement of reasons required by State v. A.T.C., 239 N.J. 450 (2019) need to address the timing of the plea offer?
|
|
A-79-24 East Orange Educational Support Professionals’ Association v. East Orange Board of Education (090489) Read Appellate Opinion A-3657-21 Was the arbitrator’s decision -- that the East Orange Board of Education violated the collective bargaining agreement with its custodial employees when it ceased paying them extra compensation for reporting to work when schools were closed for COVID-19 -- reasonably debatable in light of N.J.S.A. 18A:7F-9(e)(1) (providing that during a state of emergency, school employees shall be compensated “as if the school facilities remained open”)?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-79-24 Part 1
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-79-24 Part 2
|
|
A-78-24 Hoboken for Responsible Cannabis, Inc. v. City of Hoboken Planning Board (090287) Did the submission of a complete application to the City of Hoboken Cannabis Review Board trigger the Municipal Land Use Law’s Time of Application Rule, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-10.5, which provides that the “development regulations which are in effect on the date of submission of an application for development shall govern the review of that application for development and any decision made with regard to that application for development”?
|
|
A-77-24 J.H. v. Warren Hills Board of Education (090726) Read Appellate Opinion A-2896-23 Does the 2019 amendment to the Child Sexual Abuse Act that eliminated the “within the household” requirement for passive abuser liability, see L. 2019, c. 120, § 4 (amending N.J.S.A. 2A:61B-1(a)(1)), apply to this lawsuit filed after the December 1, 2019 effective date of the amendment, but concerning alleged conduct that occurred exclusively before the effective date of the amendment?
|
|
A-74/75/76-24 Allstate New Jersey Insurance Company v. Carteret Comprehensive Medical Care, PC (090337) Read Appellate Opinion A-0778-23 Are claims of insurance fraud under the New Jersey Insurance Fraud Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 17:33A-1 to -30, and the New Jersey Anti-Racketeering Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:41-1 to -6.2, subject to arbitration under the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act, N.J.S.A. 39:6A-1.1 to -35?
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-74/75/76-24 Part 1
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-74/75/76-24 Part 2
|
|
A-73-24 Jari Almonte v. Township of Union (090169) Read Appellate Opinion A-2968-22 Under the circumstances presented, are the paramedics entitled to immunity because they provided advanced life support services “in accordance with this act” as required by N.J.S.A. 26:2K-14, specifically, N.J.S.A. 26:2K-10(a), which requires that the paramedic “maintains direct voice communication with and is taking orders from a licensed physician or physician directed registered professional nurse”?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-73-24
|
|
A-72-24 Alex Rosetti v. Ramapo-Indian Hills Regional High School Board of Education (090375) Read Appellate Opinion A-1466-23 Does the Open Public Records Act compel the disclosure of email logs of public officials’ personal email accounts discussing public business?
Watch the
Listen to the
Oral Argument Audio for
A-72-24
|