Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Search

  • Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Contact List, Name Address Contact Atlantic/Cape May Overs, Carolina Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Atlantic/Cape May Atlantic County Civil Courthouse 1201 Bacharach Boulevard Atlantic City, New Jersey 08401 Phone: 609-402-0100 ext. 47036 Email: ATLProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Bergen Marfino, Elena Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Bergen Bergen County Justice Center 10 Main Street Suite/Room 124 Hackensack, New Jersey 07601 Phone: 201-221-0700 ext. 25209 Email: BERProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Burlington Coleman, Lyssa Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Burlington Burlington County Court Facility 49 Rancocas Road Suite/Room Municipal Division Mount Holly, New Jersey 08060 Phone: 609-288-9500 ext. 38045 Email: BURProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Camden Mejia, Georgette Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Camden Camden County Hall of Justice 101 South 5th Street Suite/Room 680 Camden, New Jersey 08103 Phone: 856-650-9100 ext. 43960 Email: CAMProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Cumberland/Gloucester/Salem Demarzio, Joseph Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Cumberland/Gloucester/Salem Salem County Courthouse 92 Market Street Salem, New Jersey 08079 Phone: 856-878-5050 Email: VIC15ProBono.mbx @njcourts.gov Essex Dunnemann, James Assistant Municipal Division Manager, Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Essex Municipal Division Essex County Veterans Courthouse 50 West Market Street Suite/Room 716 Newark, New Jersey 07102 Phone: 973-776-9300 ext. 55714 Email: ESXProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Hudson Gambino, Jennifer Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Hudson Hudson County Administration Bldg 595 Newark Avenue Suite/Room TCA's Office Jersey City, New Jersey 07306 Phone: 201-748-4400 ext. 60521 Email: HudProBono.mailbox @njcourts.gov Mercer Bare, Karen Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Mercer Mercer County Criminal Courthouse 400 South Warren Street Suite/Room 109 Trenton, New Jersey 08650-0068 Phone: 609-571-4200 ext. 74048 Email: MerProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Middlesex VACANT Statewide Pro Bono Coordinator Middlesex Middlesex County Courthouse PO Box 964 New Brunswick, New Jersey 08903-0964 Phone: 732-645-4300 ext. 88837 Email: MIDProBono.Mailbox @njcourts.gov Pagination 1 Go to page 2 2 Go to next page > Next page Showing 1 to 20 of 33 items
  • Cassidy DWI Cases, DWI Convictions Involving Equipment Not Properly Calculated The Supreme Court found that in some driving while intoxicated (DWI) cases, some Alcotest machines were not properly calibrated. It ruled that results from those machines could not be used to convict a defendant of DWI. As a result, more than 13,000 DWI cases are eligible for review. The majority of eligible cases are in Middlesex, Monmouth, Somerset, and Union counties. Requests for review should be submitted to the court where the original DWI case was heard. Municipal Court Addresses Find a Municipal Court County Breakdown Find a Superior Court, Try to get a Lawyer, It is a good idea to get a lawyer to help you with your case. The New Jersey State Bar Association website has a list of  https://njsba.com/resources/county-bar-associations/ lawyer referral organizations . If you cannot afford a lawyer, you might be eligible for a public defender. A judge will decide if you are eligible for a public defender based on your income and other factors.  Income Eligibility Guidelines for Indigent Defense Services Review the income guidelines . Complete the indigency section of the review request form if you want to request a public defender., Learn more about State v. Cassidy, Read the May 11 Notice to the Bar Notice - Review of DWI Convictions Involving Not Properly Calibrated Equipment (STATE V. CASSIDY) Read the July 22 Notice to the Bar Read the State v. Eileen Cassidy Supreme Court Opinion See Notable Cases - Overview Court orders and other documents filed in this case., Court Services, Accommodations under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Request an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). Interpreting Services Request an interpreter for your court hearing. For general questions, contact  QuestionsCassidy.Mbx@njcourts.gov .
  • Model Civil Jury Charges, Body   The Model Civil Jury Charges are a framework for building a set of jury instructions. Each case turns on unique facts and trial courts and litigants must tailor the model charges to conform to the facts and circumstances of the case being tried. The Committee on Model Civil Jury Charges attempts to keep the model charges current with the state of the law. Where applicable, trial judges and litigants must tailor the Model Civil Jury Charges to reflect changes in the law since the Committee published any particular model jury charge. Accordingly, the Model Civil Jury Charge Committee reminds trial judges and litigants that the Model Civil Jury Charges are merely the starting point of the process of constructing an appropriate charge that adequately explains the law to the jury in the context of the material facts of the case being tried. Read Directive #04-07 Jury Selection Standards and Voir Dire Questions Directive #04-07 Jury Selection Standards and Voir Dire Questions Read the Standard Jury Selections for Civil Trials Standard Jury Selections for Civil Trials See all Model Civil Jury Charges in Notices to the Bar Notices to the Bar related to Model Civil Jury Charges, Committee on Model Civil Jury Charges, The Model Civil Jury Charge Committee Model Civil Jury Charge Committee is a standing committee of the New Jersey Supreme Court. The New Jersey Supreme Court does not sanction or approve the model charges before publication by the Committee, although the Court does sometimes comment on the sufficiency of a charge in the context of a particular case. The Committee prepares and updates model civil jury charges to be useful to trial judges and litigants to accomplish the important function of adequately and understandably instructing civil juries. The charges provide model instructions and related clarifying judges’ notes. The charges are created to enhance comprehension by jurors, while retaining a balanced and accurate statement of the law., 2022-2024 Committee Members, Judge Michael V. Cresitello, Jr., Chair Judge Mara Zazzali-Hogan, Vice-Chair Sean P. Buckley Judge Timothy W. Chell David J. Dering Judge Bina K. Desai Michael J. Epstein Erica Leigh Fields Corey J. Gaul Craig J. Hubert Judge Sarah Beth Johnson Marian I. Kelly Evan J. Lide Cristie R. Nastasi Judge John D. O’Dwyer Ryan A. Richman Stefani C. Schwartz Asaad K. Siddiqi Kristi Jasberg Robinson, Committee Staff Suvarna Sampale, Committee Staff  
  • JOBS Program, Body, JOBS Program Overview, The Judiciary’s Opportunities for Building Success (JOBS) program provides a tremendous benefit to both hiring companies and successful recovery court and probation clients. More than 130,000 New Jerseyans are under probation supervision. Surveys have shown that more than half are unemployed or underemployed.  Chief Justice Stuart Rabner and retired Glenn A. Grant, administrative director of the courts, developed the JOBS program to help probation clients gain stable employment so they can rebuild their lives and contribute to society.  Working with the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development, colleges and universities, business, industry and governmental agencies, the Judiciary has developed workforce development programs and a growing network of companies and non-profit organizations now participating in the JOBS program.  Probation clients can and will make good employees. Our goal is to help them find employment at a living wage with benefits, which we believe will act as a pathway to changing their lives and our communities.   View the  JOBS video  or JOBS Brochure read the JOBS brochure ., For Prospective Employers, JOBS Business Partnerships, The Judiciary seeks private businesses and non-profit organizations to join the program. We can help our partners build a workforce that reflects the broad diversity of the communities in which they operate and market their services.  Join the growing list of JOBS partners, such as:  ShopRite Wakefern Amazon Audible Wayfair Hard Rock Hotel & Casino Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital NJ Transit Goya Foods, Inc. Traffic Plan Cooper University Hospital Jingoli Community Food Bank of New Jersey PSE&G Atlantic City Electric, Partnership with the New Jersey Department of Labor, The Judiciary has partnered with the New Jersey Department of Labor (DOL) to help probation clients  secure jobs with a living wage and benefits. The JOBS program has been working with employment liaisons and DOL One-Stop Centers in each vicinage to provide workforce development assistance.  The DOL has provided $9 million in direct grants to workforce development providers to institute programs to prepare probation clients for employment. , Partnership with the New Jersey Presidents’ Council, The New Jersey Presidents’ Council (NJPC) is a group of the 55 colleges and universities in New Jersey formed to advance the interests of higher education in the state. NJPC members have pledged to hire probation clients and to consider scholarships to incentivize further education and workforce development on member campuses, including the state’s community colleges.  NJPC members have received DOL grant funding to help probation clients with workforce development and to securing jobs with a living wage and benefits. The JOBS program also has joined with the NJPC to start a paid internship program for students in the Judiciary’s probation division. Many of these students now work in the probation division.   Email  AOCJOBSProgram.Mailbox@njcourts.gov  to learn more and become a JOBS partner.   Get the latest news, events and testimonials in the JOBS newsletter and in our videos., JOBS Journal, JOBS Journal 2024 Winter JOBS Journal 2024 Winter JOBS Journal 2023 Fall JOBS Journal 2023 Fall JOBS Journal 2023 Spring JOBS Journal 2023 Spring JOBS Journal 2022 Fall JOBS Journal 2022 Fall JOBS Journal 2022 Spring JOBS Journal 2022 Spring, Videos, JOBS Mission Statement Video, JOBS Mission Statement, :,   Learn about the JOBS program and it’s mission. APEX Graduation Video, APEX Graduation, :,   Probation clients graduate from Apex Solutions Group’s train to hire program. Apex Solutions Group.  Apex has partnered with the JOBS program to provide participants with the education and management skills needed to qualify for employment. JOBS Testimonial video, JOBS Testimonial, :,  Chris Paladino, president of the New Brunswick Development Corp., discusses hiring probation clients for construction jobs. JOBS Testimonial Video, JOBS Testimonial, :,  Joe Jingoli, CEO of Joseph Jingoli & Son, Inc., a company that works in the power/energy, economic development, healthcare, gaming, education, and industrial/manufacturing sectors, discusses hiring probation clients and the partnership between his company and the Judiciary. New Brunswick Train to Hire Program Video, New Brunswick Train to Hire, :, Probation clients discuss training that will lead to stable jobs., How Does the JOBS Program Work? , The probation division in all 21 counties oversees the program. Staff will provide resumes to employers when a new opportunity opens. Probation staff are available to consult with the employer during and after the selection process.  Probation staff will:  Help match qualified candidates to a job. Connect employers with probation clients. Create job fairs and interviews. Reach out to business of every size and employment agencies. Provide job readiness training when appropriate., Hire Our Clients with Confidence , The probation division also provides monitoring and supervision of the employee. This could include ongoing drug screening. In addition, all employees hired through JOBS are eligible for the federal bonding program., For Recovery Court and Probation Clients , Successful recovery court and probation clients can seek employment through the JOBS program . For general probation information, visit the Probation Client Portal . For more job services, visit the NJ Department of Labor and Workforce Development ., JOBS Program Eligibility, Potential participants must:  Be under active probation supervision in recovery court, Intensive Supervision Program, or general community supervision. Cooperate with probation supervision. Submit to drug screening (for all recovery court and select probation clients).   Probation clients can benefit from JOBS Program: Train to Hire job readiness training .  Probation staff work to find jobs across a wide range of industries and roles. Job types include warehouse, driver/CDL, sales, healthcare, food service, and more.  Consider joining the federal bond program., Upcoming Job Fairs  , See all Upcoming Events JOBS program Career Fairs ., Make a Difference, Join this growing movement by either hiring individuals involved with probation or contacting your probation officer and becoming a part of the program. We can help the economy, improve lives, and make our communities better. 
  • New Jersey Judiciary Forms Help Page, Forms are available on the Forms Self-Help Resource Center and Attorneys Legal Practice Forms pages in Adobe Acrobat (PDF) format. If you do not find the form you need on either of those pages, please contact the webmaster mailbox at . If you are having difficulty opening, filling out, or printing our forms, please see the specific instructions below., Troubleshooting, Error, : "Please wait..." or "...need Adobe Reader 8.0 or higher" error in a PDF, Background, : When seeing this message, the form you are trying to use REQUIRES the use of either Adobe Reader or Acrobat Pro. This form will, NOT, work in the web browser or on a mobile device. Use one of the solutions below in order to open the dynamic form., Solution 1, : Save the PDF, then open with Adobe Reader or Acrobat Pro. Right click in the PDF webpage window. Select "Save" or "Save as..." or click the "Save" or "Save As" icon at the top right. Select a location to save the file. Open the newly saved file with Adobe Reader or Acrobat Pro, not the web browser., Solution 2, : Open the form link with Adobe Reader or Acrobat Pro. Go back to the web page that linked to this form. Right click the form's hyperlink. Select "Copy Link". Open Adobe Reader or Acrobat Pro. Select "File" and then "Open". The Open dialog box will appear. Paste the hyperlink you copied into the "File Name:" field, and click the "Open" button. The form will open., Content Appears to be Blank, Opening a PDF attachment in an email on the iPad (or iPhone), will open in iBooks (the default PDF viewer for Apple). iBooks will display the PDF as a blank, print only form, as it does not show the form fields. To see the data in the form, you need to open it in Adobe Acrobat DC. Press and hold the attachment icon in the email. A screen will appear that will allow you to select the option "Open in Adobe Acrobat". Once the form opens in Adobe Acrobat, the data on the form will appear., Data Not Saving, When you open a PDF form inside a browser, it may not save your data, or it may not let you edit the completed form. You may be able to print the completed form if saving is disabled. Make sure to open your PDF in Reader (right click, save, open in Reader) if you need to save form data. For additional forms needs, please email   webmaster.mbx@njcourts.gov
  • Jury Selection Standards and Voir Dire Questions, Jury Selection -- Model Voir Dire Questions Promulgated by Directive #21-06 -- Revised Procedures and Questions Directive #04-07 - Jury Selection Standards and Voir Dire Questions Model Jury Selection Questions - Criminal Standard Jury Selection Questions - Criminal Model Jury Selection Questions - Civil Standard Jury Selection Questions - Civil
  • Interpreting Policies and Resources, Interpreting Policies and Resources, The Judiciary’s Directive #10-22 Language Access Plan is the official resource for court policies and standards on language access. The plan is grounded in these basic tenets: Anyone who is limited in their ability to speak and/or understand English or is Deaf or hard of hearing is entitled to the same access to, and meaningful participation in, the court process and services as people without language access needs; Only qualified interpreters may interpret; and All costs for interpreting are to be borne by the Judiciary, except in very limited instances. Interpreters need to follow certain rules in court. The Code of Professional Conduct for Interpreters, Transliterators, and Translators code of conduct covers what is expected., Considerations for Deaf or Hard of Hearing Individuals, Most NJ Statutes - Sign Language Interpreting Rules sign language rules are for court goers such as plaintiffs, defendants, witnesses etc. However, the court has Appendix 11 - Guidelines for Trials Involving Deaf Jurors Who Serve With the Assistance of American Sign Language Interpreters special procedures for deaf or hard of hearing jurors as well. Not all deaf and hard-of-hearing individuals are proficient in ASL. Some use foreign sign languages, an unofficial form of sign language, screen readers, or other forms of communication. The judiciary is committed to ensuring all people have access. In these circumstances, there are Appendix 12 - Guidelines for Using Specialist Interpreters for People Who are Deaf and Hard of Hearing guidelines for using specialist interpreters ., Telephone Interpreting, Review Operational Standards for Telephone Interpreting telephone interpreting standards to learn more. Telephone interpreting can be used for: Emergent matters where no in-person interpreter is available. Non-emergent matters that take 30 minutes or less when no in-person interpreter is available. The cost of an in-person interpreter is so much more than the cost of the telephone interpreter that it would be fiscally irresponsible to choose in-person interpreting. The quality of the interpreting must be just as good as an in-person interpreter., The following only applies in Superior Court: , Suggested Voir Dire to Determine Qualifications of Unregistered Interpreters Voir Dire to Determine Qualifications of Unregistered Interpreters Court Interpreter Band Specifications Specifications for Interpreter Positions, Court Rules and Statutes, Court Rules 3:6-6, re Grand Jury “Who May Be Present; Record and Transcript (a) Attendance at Session. No person other than the jurors, the prosecuting attorney, the clerk of the grand jury, the witness under examination, interpreters when needed and, for the purpose of recording the proceedings, a stenographer or operator of a recording device may be present while the grand jury is in session. No person other than the jurors, the clerk, the prosecuting attorney and the stenographer or operator of the recording device may be present while the grand jury is deliberating. The grand jury, however, may request (1) either the prosecuting attorney and the stenographer or operator or (2) the clerk to leave the jury room during its deliberations. [emphasis added]” Statutes N.J.S.A. 2B:8-1: “Title 2B, Court Organization and Civil Code Chapter 8. Interpreters and Translators 2B:8-1. Interpreters. Each county shall provide interpreting services necessary for cases from that county in the Law Division and the Family Part of the Chancery Division. A county may provide interpreting services through the use of persons hired for that purpose. If interpreters are employed, they shall be appointed and shall perform their duties in the manner established by the Chief Justice, and shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. For the purpose of determining their compensation, these employees shall be considered county employees. Source: N.J.S. 2A:11-28 to N.J.S. 2A: 11-30. L. 1991, c. 119, The following only applies in municipal court:, This is a verbatim compilation arranged in chronological order of all statutes, court rules, case law, directives, and actions taken by the Supreme Court in response to recommendations of task forces and committees on the subject of the responsibility of the Judiciary to pay for court interpreters. While the authorities do not universally agree, all of the recommendations that the Supreme Court has approved make it clear that it is the policy of the Judiciary to provide equal access to courts for linguistic minorities, which means paying for whatever interpreting services may be necessary. Municipal Court Bulletin Letter #176(1), Municipal Court Budgets, The judge of each municipal court should annually prepare and submit a budget for the expense of operating the court. Included should be such items as: ...3. Payment of interpreters where experience has indicated the need for such services. Directive #10-84(2), Interpreters for Persons with Hearing Impairments, ...7. At the present time, the costs of these interpreting services, when rendered in the Superior Court, shall be paid by the county in which the services are provided and, when delivered in the Municipal Courts, shall be paid out of the budget of the Municipal Court in which the services are rendered. Report of the Supreme Court Task Force on The Improvement of Municipal Courts (3), Position 5.4, Language Interpreters and Translators, The courts must be equally accessible to all persons regardless of their ability to communicate effectively in English. It is the responsibility of the court to seek to provide qualified interpreters where necessary. Supreme Court Task Force on Drugs and the Courts (4), Recommendation 8: Standards on Interpreting and Translation, Defendants' rights to understand the proceedings against them are critical in the criminal justice process. Improvements need to be made in the services provided defendants who do not speak English. Interpreter and translation services should be routinely available in the courts.... Press Release Re: Supreme Court's Response to the Final Report of the Supreme Court Task Force on Interpreter Translation Services (5) In its review of the report by its Task Force on Interpreter and Translation Services, the Court endorse the Task Force's "guiding principle" that the Courts should be equally accessible to all persons, regardless of their ability to communicate in English. Municipal Court Budgets Joint Memo (6) Barry Skokowski, Deputy Commissioner and Director, Division of Local Government Services, and Robert D. Lipscher, Administrative Director of the Courts, issued this memo summarizing the results of a meeting held to provide an understanding of what municipal court expenses our offices consider to be appropriate in light of the enactment of Chapter 95, Laws of 1990" (at 1). The memo indicates that appropriations for municipal court budgets are to be outside the cap established by the legislation and that the category Salary and Wages should include salaries for municipal Judiciary employees who are directly employed by the municipal courts [which would include anyone on staff who interprets, although they are not specifically named in the memo] and Other Expenses which includes appropriations for court interpreters... (at 2). Supreme Court Action Plan on Minority Concerns (7) The Court reiterates its position that the courts and their support services shall be equally accessible for all persons regardless of the degree to which they are able to communicate effectively in the English language. Linguistic barriers to access shall be overcome by providing qualified interpreters and bilingual court support personnel. To reach these goals, the AOC shall expeditiously develop and submit to the Court for its consideration a comprehensive set of standards for assuring equal access to courts and their support services for linguistic minorities. The Judiciary shall also continue to seek adequate funding for full implementation of the goals of (1) providing qualified interpreters to all persons needing them, (2) expanding its program for training court interpreters, and (3) compensating interpreters adequately. Title 2B, Court Organization and Civil Code, Chapter 8. Interpreters and Translators, 2B:8-1. Interpreters. Each county shall provide interpreting services necessary for cases from that county in the Law Division and the Family Part of the Chancery Division. A county may provide interpreting services through the use of persons hired for that purpose. If interpreters are employed, they shall be appointed and shall perform their duties in the manner established by the Chief Justice, and shall serve at the pleasure of the appointing authority. For the purpose of determining their compensation, these employees shall be considered county employees. Source: N.J.S. 2A:11-28 to N.J.S. 2A: 11-30. L. 1991, c. 119 EDITOR'S NOTE: While this statute applies only to Superior Court and not Municipal Courts, the legislative intent that the Judiciary is responsible for providing interpreters in Superior Court out of public funds is a noteworthy precedent., State v. Rodriguez (8), To summarize this court's ruling: A non-English-speaking municipal court defendant has a right to a court interpreter if the charge(s) against him is such as to threaten imprisonment or any other consequence of magnitude; The decision as to when a court interpreter is necessary rests within the sound discretion of the trial court, although public policy and federal law suggest that an interpreter should be called upon whenever a party's understanding of the proceedings or ability to communicate is inhibited due to a lack of proficiency in English; ... If the municipal court defendant requires and rightfully merits a court interpreter but can not afford to pay for one, the court should provide a court interpreter at public expense. at 143-144. (November 1970) at 1. This provision has subsequently been reiterated as follows: NEW JERSEY MUNICIPAL COURT MANUAL 83 (February 1972); NEW JERSEY MUNICIPAL COURT MANUAL 93 (January 1977); MUNICIPAL COURT BULLETIN LETTER #9/10-80 1 (September & October 1980); MUNICIPAL COURT BULLETIN LETTER #7/8-81 2 (July & August 1981); MUNICIPAL COURT BULLETIN LETTER #9/10-82 1 (September & October 1982). At 2 (April 12, 1985). At 151-152 (June 28, 1985). When the Supreme Court reviewed the recommendations of the task force, the Court approved this recommendation as modified by the addition of "to seek." Minutes of the March 30, 1987 SCAC at 14. FINAL REPORT 33 (April 1991). At 1 (June 19, 1986). November 28, 1990. The Action Plan was published by the Supreme Court on August 16, 1993. State v. Rodriguez, 294 N.J. Super. 129 (Law Div. 1996)., For more information on municipal court interpreters, review these job descriptions from the Civil Service Commission:, Court Interpreter Spanish and English Court Interpreter Spanish & English Court Interpreter Sp & Eng/Municipal CRT Attendant Bi Sp/Eng Court Interpreter Spanish and English Court Interpreter Sp & Eng/Municipal CRT Attendant Bi Sp/Eng Court Interpreter Spanish and English
  • Directories for Division Managers, The following directories provide contact information for division managers and probation officers in the New Jersey Courts. Find the correct directory below. , Find Contact Information for Division Managers, Civil Division Manager Conference Contact List Civil Division Managers Criminal Division Manager Conference Contact List Criminal Division Managers Family Division Manager Conference Contact List Family Division Managers Finance Division Manager Conference Contact List Finance Division Managers Human Resource Division Managers Human Resources Division Managers Municipal Division Manager Conference Contact List Municipal Division Managers Operations Division Managers Contact List Operations Division Managers Probation Division Manager Contact List Probation Division Managers
  • History of Appointments to the New Jersey Supreme Court, The first chief justice of the New Jersey Supreme Court under the 1947 state constitution was Arthur T. Vanderbilt, and the original six associate justices were Henry E. Ackerson, Albert E. Burling, Clarence E. Case, Harry Heher, A. Dayton Oliphant and William A. Wachenfeld. As each justice departed the court, the name of the justice who succeeded them is listed below theirs on the grid below. For example, Joseph Weintraub succeeded Vanderbilt as chief justice and William J. Brennan Jr. succeeded Ackerson. The names of those who now sit on the court are listed at the bottom of each grid. Click on the name of each chief justice and associate justice for their biography. As of Nov. 13, 2023, Arthur T. Vanderbilt, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner 6/29/2007 - Currently sitting Chief Justice James R. Zazzali 10/26/2006 - 6/17/2007 Chief Justice Deborah T. Poritz 7/10/1996 - 10/25/2006 Chief Justice Robert N. Wilentz 8/10/1979 - 6/30/1996 Chief Justice Richard J. Hughes 12/18/1973 - 8/9/1979 Chief Justice Pierre Garven 9/1/1973 - 10/19/1973 Chief Justice Joseph Weintraub 8/20/1957 - 8/31/1973 Chief Justice Arthur T. Vanderbilt 9/15/1948 - 6/16/1957, Henry E. Ackerson, Associate Justice Fabiana Pierre-Louis 9/1/2020 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Walter F. Timpone 5/22/2016 - 8/31/2020 Associate Justice John E. Wallace Jr. 5/20/2003 - 5/19/2010 Associate Justice James H. Coleman Jr. 12/17/1994 - 5/3/2003 Associate Justice Robert L. Clifford 9/1/1973 - 12/16/1994 Associate Justice Pierre Garven 3/23/1973 - 9/1/1973 Associate Justice John J. Francis 8/20/1957 - 9/2/1972 Associate Justice Joseph Weintraub 11/19/1956 - 8/20/1957 Associate Justice William J. Brennan Jr. 3/13/1952 - 10/16/1956 Associate Justice Henry A. Ackerson Jr. 9/15/1948 - 1/20/1952, Albert E. Burling, Associate Justice Anne M. Patterson 9/1/2011 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Peter G. Verniero 9/1/1999 - 8/31/2004 Associate Justice Stewart G. Pollock 6/28/1979 - 8/31/1999 Associate Justice Worrall F. Mountain 3/15/1971 - 6/27/1979 Associate Justice Vincent S. Haneman 11/28/1960 - 3/1/1971 Associate Justice Albert E. Burling 9/15/1948 - 10/29/1960, Clarence E. Case, Associate Justice Michael Noriega 7/6/2023 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Barry T. Albin 9/18/2002 - 7/7/2022 Associate Justice Gary S. Stein 1/11/1985 - 8/31/2002 Associate Justice Sidney M. Schreiber 2/28/1975 - 11/17/1984 Associate Justice Nathan L. Jacobs 3/13/1952 - 2/27/1975 Associate Justice Clarence Edwards Case 9/15/1948 - 2/16/1952, Harry Heher, Associate Justice Douglas M. Fasciale 10/21/2022 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Faustino J. Fernandez-Vina 11/19/2013 - 2/9/2022 Associate Justice Helen E. Hoens 10/26/2006 - 10/26/2013 Associate Justice Daniel J. O'Hern 8/11/1981 - 5/22/2000 Associate Justice Mark A. Sullivan 3/23/1973 - 8/10/1981 Associate Justice Thomas C. Schettino 3/20/1959 - 9/9/1972 Associate Justice Harry Heher 9/15/1948 - 3/19/1959, A. Dayton Oliphant, Associate Justice Rachel Wainer Apter 10/21/2022 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Jaynee LaVecchia 2/1/2000 - 12/31/2021 Associate Justice Marie L. Garibaldi 11/17/1982 - 1/31/2000 Associate Justice Morris Pashman 6/16/1973 - 9/26/1982 Associate Justice Haydn Proctor 10/28/1957 - 6/15/1973 Associate Justice Dayton A. Oliphant 9/15/1948 - 10/27/1957, William A. Wachenfeld, Associate Justice John Jay Hoffman 10/2/2024 - Currently sitting Associate Justice Lee A. Solomon 6/19/2014 - 8/17/2024 Associate Justice Virginia A. Long 9/1/1999 - 2/29/2012 Associate Justice Alan B. Handler 3/23/1977 - 8/31/1999 Associate Justice Fredrick W. Hall 2/24/1959 - 3/31/1975 Associate Justice William A. Wachenfeld 9/15/1948 - 2/13/1959
  • Parenting Coordinator Program, Body This program is designed to help parents implement their parenting plan and resolve day-to-day parenting issues with the assistance of a neutral third party. For example, one parent wants to change the court-ordered visitation time and the other parent disagrees. The Parenting Coordinator would talk to each parent to see if they could agree and would make a recommendation if they could not agree. Benefits of a parenting coordinator include: Effective communication with a focus on the child’s best interest. Reduced misunderstandings and a process for parents to reach a mutual compromise. Reduced litigation in court. Lower costs and shorter timeframes., Find Your Own Parenting Coordinator, Under Court Rule 5:8D the court may appoint a parenting coordinator selected by the parties. This can be a professional who is not on the Judiciary's roster, or it can be someone the parents trust, such as a mutual friend or community member. The benefit of choosing someone they know is that the person is familiar with the family members and their unique situation. , Use a Parenting Coordinator from the Court’s Roster, The court can appoint a parenting coordinator from the Judiciary's roster of trained professionals. They are often attorneys, mediators, or mental health professions who have completed mandatory training. They charge an hourly fee for their services., Apply to Be a Parenting Coordinator, If you want to be listed on the court’s roster as a professional parenting coordinator, Application for Admission to the Roster of Statewide Approved Parenting Coordinators you need to apply . Approved parenting coordinators can also Roster of Statewide Parenting Coordinators Change/Update Form change or update their roster status . For more information, contact the Family Practice Division at 609-815-2900 ext. 55350 or email AOCFamily.Mailbox@njcourts.gov ., Parenting Coordinators Roster, Location - Any - Administrative Office of the Courts Atlantic Cumberland Hunterdon Mays Landing Morris Atlantic City Atlantic/Cape May Cape May Gloucester Somerset Sussex Bergen Salem Warren Burlington Camden Cumberland/Gloucester/Salem Essex Hudson Mercer Middlesex Monmouth Morris/Sussex Ocean Passaic Somerset/Hunterdon/Warren Union New Jersey Search Apply Filters sort by Parenting Coordinator Parenting Coordinator Approved for DV Cases sort by Hourly Rate Hourly Rate Faudia A. Hameed Clemenza, Esq. Law Office of Faudia A. Hameed Clemenza 21 Main Street Court Plaza South West Wing Suite 352 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (551) 800-2705 Email: faudia@gmail.com Yes $300.00 Holly Friedland, Esq. Jacobs Berger, LLC 16 Washington St. Morristown, NJ 07960 Phone: (973) 710-4366 Fax: (973) 710-4367 Email: holly@jacobsberger.com Yes $400.00 Jennifer S. Hall, Esq. McKenna, DuPont, Stone & Washburne 229 Broad Street Red Bank, NJ 07724 Phone: (732) 741-6681 Fax: (732) 576-1787 Email: jstonehall@redbanklaw.com I provide assistance to parents who have experienced an ongoing pattern of high conflict and/or litigation regarding their children. Ihelp parents implement and comply with court orders and parenting plans by making timely decisions to diminish the pattern of unnecessary litigation, animosity andconflict. My focus remains on the children's best interest. Yes $400.00 David S. Gomberg, Ph.D. David S. Gomberg and Associates 169 Maplewood Ave Maplewood, NJ 07040 Phone: (973) 313-9289 Fax: (973) 763-5604 Email: david@gomberg-associates.com Yes $425.00 Tamsen Thorpe, Ph.D. Directions, CLS, LLC 20 Community Pl 4th Fl Morristown, NJ 07960 Phone: (973) 425-8868 Fax: (973) 539-3687 Email: drthorpe@directions-cls.com Dr. Thorpe has been certified In Mediation Training since 2006 from the NJ Institute For Continuing Legal Education (!CLE). She received her Basic Interdisciplinary Collaborative Practice Training In 2008 from the Center for Mediation and Collaborative Divorce. She has been trained as a Parent Coordinator since 2005 through the Association of Family and Conciliatory Courts (AFCC). Dr. Thorpe also received training through the AFCC in the area of children and divorce specifically family reconciliation when a child is refusing parental visitation. She has taken numerous advanced courses to keep current in the area of high conflict families. No $350.00 Marcy A. Pasternak, Ph.D. Marcy Pasternak, Ph.D., P.A. 96 Joan Drive Watchung, NJ 07069 Phone: (908) 769-7949 Fax: (973) 753-4930 Email: marcypasternak@gmail.com Dr. Marcy Pasternak is a licensed Clinical Psychologist who practices in Watchung, N.J. She conducts parenting coordination, divorce mediation, therapeutic mediation, psychotherapy, and forensic psychological evaluations. Dr. Pasternak has served as a psychological expert in numerous counties and served on the Court Ad Hoc Committee for Parenting Coordination in 2006. Yes $450.00 Alexandra M. Coglianese, Esq. Bremer Buckner. LLC 2 University Plaza Drive, Suite 302 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (201) 488-2141 Fax: (201) 487-1257 Email: acoglianese@bremerbucknerlaw.com Ms. Coglianese has been serving as a Parent Coordinator in excess of a decade. She has extensive experience working with both high and low, conflict court involved families both pre and post judgment. Ms. Coglianese proves parenting coordination service in both FM and FD matters. No $375.00 Danielle Forshee, Ph.D. Dr. Danielle Forshee, LLC 280 Highway 35 Suire 402C Red Bank, NJ 07701 Phone: (732) 695-4353 Email: drforshee@drdanielleforshee.com Dr. Forshee is a Licensed Psychologist in New Jersey and Licensed Clinical Social Worker in New Jersey and New York, specializing in clinical and forensic psychology practice. Expertise includes high-conflict coparenting, personality, and psychological disorders. Dr. Forshee's approach is child-centered, focused on educating about children's needs and development relevant to coparenting disputes. Yes $400.00 Nicole A. Kobis, Esq. Lindabury McCormick Estabrook & Cooper 53 Cardinal Drive Westfield, NJ 07091 Phone: (908) 233-6800 Fax: (908) 233-5078 Email: nkobis@lindabury.com I work with parents to help navigate their differences focusing on what is in the children's best interests. I ensure that both parents feel that they are being treated fairly and have the opportunity to provide me with the reasoning for their beliefs and positions. No $385.00 Lynn B. Norcia, Esq. Norcia Law, LLC www.NorciaLaw.com P.O. Box 218 Millington, NJ 07946 Phone: (908) 255-3661 Fax: (908) 604-9746 Email: lnorcia@norcialaw.com As a parenting coordinator, I help parents move forward while always keeping their focus on the best interests of the children. I have extensive family mediation experience and regularly serve as a Guardian Ad Litem on behalf of the court. Flexible evening and weekend appointments are available via ZOOM. Yes $350.00 Elena K. Weitz, Esq. Offit Kurman, P.A. Court Plaza South 21 Main Street, Suite 158 Hackensack, NJ 07601 Phone: (973) 245-9854 Fax: (732) 218-1835 Email: elena.weitz@offitkurman.com I have a B.A. in psychology, focusing on early childhood development, and am a practicing attorney for nearly 20 years, solely devoted to practicing family law. I have represented countless litigants in their custody and parenting time disputes, and have experience in handling high conflict matters. No $370.00 Marianne Zembryski, Esq. Marianne Zembryski, LLC 67 Walnut Avenue Suite 109 Clark, NJ 07066 Phone: (732) 340-1813 Fax: (732) 340-1826 Email: mzembryski@mariannezembryski.com I have always maintained a resolution-oriented family law practice. The most rewarding service I can perform is assisting parties in reducing conflict and moving their lives forward, including when fulfilling the role of parenting coordinator. No $350.00 Rebecca P. Stern, JD Pearl Mediation 169 W. Grand Ave Montvale, NJ 07645 Phone: (917) 848-4224 Email: rebecca@pearlmediation.com Rebecca Stern is a divorce & family mediator, certified co-parenting specialist, parenting coordinator, special education parent advocate, and founder of Pearl Mediation. A professional problem-solver, Rebecca navigates clients through high-conflict situations, building child-focused enduring agreements that limit court involvement, and move families forward on solid ground feeling heard, educated and empowered. No $400.00 Melissa Cipriano, Esq. Cipriano Law Office, PC 175 Fairfield Ave Suite 4 C/D West Caldwell, NJ 07006 Phone: (973) 403-8600 Fax: (973) 403-8610 Email: mcipriano@ciprianolaw.com I have been practicing family law for 25 years. I am a qualified mediator and qualified domestic violence mediator. I am also trained in collaborative law. I am also a trial attorney having tried several divorce cases and domestic violence cases. I have also been a parent coordinator for several years and have now completed the statewide PC course. Yes $400.00 Laurie L. Newmark, Esq. Townsend Tomaio and Newmark 100 South Jefferson Rd. Whippany, NJ 07981 Phone: (973) 539-0075 Fax: (973) 539-4151 Email: lln@ttnlaw.com Laurie Newmark is a certified matrimonial attorney in the State of NJ. She is also a qualified mediator in the State of NJ and a licensed family mediator in the State of FL. Ms. Newmark has her B.A. in psychology and has completed the AFCC training for parent coordination. No $400.00 Linda A. Schofel, Esq., LCSW Snyder Sarno D'Aniello Marceri & da Costa LLC 425 Eagle Rock Avenue Roseland, NJ 07068 Phone: (973) 274-5200 Fax: (973) 275-5202 Email: lschofel@snydersarno.com Linda A. Schofel has been a family law attorney for more than 30 years. She is a Licensed Clinical Social Worker (LCSW) and is collaboratively trained. She is a trained mediator for domestic violence matters. Her background as a therapist and family lawyer has resulted in hundreds of parent coordination court appointments. Yes $360.00 Sharon R. Montgomery, Psy.D. Sharon Ryan Montgomery, Psy.D. 20 Community Place 4th Fl Morristown, NJ 07960 Phone: (973) 285-0579 Fax: (973) 539-3687 Email: sharonrmpsy@gmail.com I have been a clinical forensic psychologist for over forty years. I have conducted numerous evaluations, served as a Parenting Coordinator since 2000, conducted all types of interventions and mediations, and have a specialty as a Parent-Child Contact Problems. Yes $425.00 Cindy B. Wilson, Esq. Wilson Family Law LLC 667 Shunpike Road Suite 5 Chatham, NJ 07928 Phone: (973) 520-4275 Fax: (973) 738-0603 Email: cindy@wilsonfamilylawllc.com Cindy has focused her legal career on family law and conflict resolution. She is a Court-qualified mediator and trained in collaborative family law. She studies mediation at the Harvard Law School Program on Negotiation. Cindy was a special education teacher and understands the complex needs of children. No $395.00 Allison E. Holzman, Esq. Ross & Calandrillo, LLC 200 Sheffield Street Suite 209 Mountainside, NJ 07092 Phone: (908) 398-2300 Fax: (908) 543-4801 Email: aeh@rcfamilylawyers.com No $350.00 Jason C. Tuchman, Esq. Marotta Tuchman & Blazini, LLC 25 E. Spring Valley Avenue Suite 320 Maywood, NJ 07607 Phone: (201) 368-7713 Fax: (201) 368-7723 Email: jtuchman@mtbnjlaw.com Mr. Tuchman is a trained Parenting Coordinator with experience in dealing with divorce and high-conflict parenting situations. He is also Certified by the Supreme Court of New Jersey as a Matrimonial Law Attorney, a Court-qualified family law mediator, and specially trained as a collaborative divorce attorney. Yes $400.00 Pagination 1 Go to page 2 2 Go to page 3 3 Go to last page 4 Last page Go to next page > Next page Showing 1 to 20 of 76 items
  • Notable Cases, The New Jersey Supreme Court is recognized as one of the leading state courts in the nation. The issues that come before the Court cover a vast array of topics from the education of our children to procedures in criminal trials. Cases come to the Court because the parties cannot agree. Often the circumstances of the cases are unique. The Court then must consider the unusual and often difficult problem presented and reach a decision that is fair and informed by existing law. The following sections highlight some of the most notable cases by the New Jersey Supreme Court over the years and are designed to provide a better understanding of the Court’s work. They are not intended to provide a comprehensive statement of New Jersey law on the topics in question. Rather the sections highlight the scope of the important cases. Not all such cases are listed. Hopefully, the discussion of these notable cases will provide a better appreciation of the Court’s role and give some insight into the development of New Jersey’s law. Because law evolves, whether through case law or legislative action or constitutional amendment, the reader should understand that any law or case discussed here may have been or may be subsequently modified or overturned. Common Law Importance: New Jersey’s 1947 Constitution created a court system capable of responding to the needs of New Jersey’s citizens, and to changes in our society. For more than seven decades, New Jersey’s Supreme Court has gained recognition nationally among state high courts for its timely, prudent and well-conceived innovations to the common law. The common law, like other judicial principles, arises out of court rulings resolving controversies presented to courts by people in search of a solution. Individuals and others, ordinarily with the help of lawyers, select the issues to present to a court. In effect, the common law results from judicial decisions resolving those issues case-by-case.  Relevant Cases:, Fox v. Snow, , 6 N.J. 12 (1950), Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, , Inc 32 N.J. 358, 161 A.2d 69 (1960), Marini v. Ireland, , 56 N.J. 130, 265 A.2d 526 (1970) Read: Common Law Common Law Watch: Henningsen v Bloomfield Motors Marini v Ireland Arbitration and Mediation Importance: The New Jersey Supreme Court has recognized the need for, and benefits of, Alternative Dispute Resolution (“ADR”) programs as a means of encouraging dispositions of litigation, both before and after a complaint is filed, in an expeditious, less costly and convenient manner. Both arbitration and mediation are recognized and encouraged by court rules and case law development. The Supreme Court has established a court ordered mediation program under Rule 1:40 whereby civil cases are sent to a mediator on the court roster of approved mediators, following required education and certification, to conduct a confidential mediation prior to more formal court proceedings in the adversarial context. The mediator is required to give the parties one free hour of time for preparation and one free hour during the mediation as a means of serving the parties. A mediation can resolve the case only if the parties agree to the disposition.   An arbitration resolves the matter based on presentation of the parties and decision by the arbitrator. There are court rules, R.4:21A, regarding mandatory and voluntary arbitration of certain types of cases with de novo review by the courts thereafter, if desired.  Relevant Cases:, Kernahan v Home Warranty Administrator of Florida, , Inc., N.J. (2019), Roach v BM Motoring, LLC., , 228 N.J. 163 (2017), Morgan v Sanford Morgan Institute, , 225 N.J. 289 (2016), Atalese v U.S. Legal Servs. Group, , 219 N.J. 430 (2014), Hirsch v Amper Fin. Servs., LLC., , 215 N.J. 174 (2013), Muhammad v County Bank of Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, , 189 N.J. 1 (2006), Hojnowski v Vans Skate Park, , 187 N.J. 323 (2006), Martindale v Sandvik, Inc, , 173 N.J. 76 (2002), Garfinkel v Morristown Obstetrics and Gynecology Associates. P.A., , 168 N.J. 124 (2001), Barcon Assocs. v Tri-Asphalt Corp., , 86 N.J. 179 (1981), Fawzy v Fawzy, , 199 NJ 456 (2009), Willingboro Mall, Ltd. v 240/242 Franklin Avenue, LLC., , 215 N.J. 242 (2013), State v Williams, , 184 N.J. 432 (2005) Read: Arbitration Arbitration and Mediation Criminal Procedure Importance: The first New Jersey constitution, adopted in 1776, was a brief document setting up the structure of the government. As with the federal constitution adopted in 1789, it did not include a list of personal rights. Although the federal constitution swiftly remedied this omission, it was not until New Jersey’s second constitution, adopted in 1844, that New Jersey set forth an explicit listing of a criminal defendant’s rights. These included the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures; the right to have a grand jury determine whether there was sufficient evidence to initiate criminal proceedings against a defendant; the right to be tried by a jury, in proceedings that were speedy and public; and the right not to be placed in criminal jeopardy twice for the same offense. This explicit listing was continued in our 1947 constitution. Although New Jersey has recognized these rights as constitutionally required for more than 170 years, it is only recently that our Supreme Court has looked to our own constitution to assess whether a defendant’s rights have been protected. For many years it was guided by the approach taken by the United States Supreme Court, which originally held the view that the provisions of the federal Bill of Rights governed proceedings in the federal court but were not applicable to proceedings in state courts. That view changed dramatically in the 1960s when the United States Supreme Court, under Chief Justice Earl Warren, held that certain of these rights were indeed applicable in state court proceedings. It did so by utilizing the incorporation doctrine, ruling that the due process and equal protection clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment incorporated certain of the federally-guaranteed rights of the first ten amendments. The Supreme Court’s process of incorporation was incremental, rather than blanket.  Relevant Cases:, Miranda v Arizona, , 384 U.S. 436 (1966), State v. Johnson, , 68 N.J. 349 (1975), State v. Hagans, , 232 N.J. 43 (2018), State v. Novembrino, , 105 N.J. 95 (1985), United States v. Leon, , 468 U.S. 897 (1984), State v. Hempele, , 120 N.J. 182 (1990), California v. Greenwood, , 486 U.S. 35 (1988), State v. Reed, , 133 N.J. 237 (1993), Moran v. Burbine, , 475 U.S. 412 (1986), State v. Pena-Flores,, 198 N.J. 6 (2009), State v. Witt, , 223 N.J. 409 (2015), State v Cromedy, , 158 N.J. 112 (1999), State v. Henderson, , 208 N.J. 208 (2011) Read: Criminal Procedure Criminal Procedure Watch: State v Henderson Education Importance: Incumbent upon civilized society is an underlying obligation to provide properly for the education of its citizenry. Without such an education, members of society lack one of the only means available to social and economic advancement. The citizens of New Jersey recognize that principle, and it is incorporated into the state’s 1947 Constitution. Article VIII, §4, paragraph 1 states, “The Legislature shall provide for the maintenance and support of a through and efficient system of free public schools for the instruction of all the children in the State between the ages of five and eighteen years.” Implementing that important public policy has proven to be challenging over the years. The New Jersey Supreme Court has revisited this issue of “thorough and efficient” education for close to fifty years. In large part the problems have been the sources of funding and quality of education provided in various school districts. The Court has been at the center of the funding issue.   The Court has also examined other issues bearing a correlation to the education of New Jersey’s residents. The cases that touch on education issues are far ranging. Examples include school busing, the interplay between private and public schools, and labor relationships within the school district. The Court has also addressed quasi-criminal matters involving the rights of students. The importance of these issues is evident from the breadth and depth of the Supreme Court’s involvement. The following is a sampling of key cases involving education. Relevant Cases:, Yanow v. Seven Oaks Park, Inc., , 11 N.J. 341 (1953), Booker v. Board of Education, , 45 N.J. 161 (1965), West Morris Regional Board of Education v. Sills, , 58 N.J. 464 (1971), Jenkins v. Morris School Dist., , 58 N.J. 483 (1971), Robinson v. Cahill, , 69 N.J. 449 (1976), N.J. Asso. for Retarded Citizens v. N.J. Dep’t of Human Servs., , 89 N.J. 234 (1982), Abbott v. Burke, , 100 N.J. 269 (1985), Bd. of Educ. v. Neptune Twp. Educ. Ass’n, , 144 N.J. 16 (1996), Joye v. Hunterdon Cent. Reg’l High Sch. Bd. Of Educ., , 176 N.J. 568 (2003), L.W. ex rel. L.G. v. Toms River Regional Schools Bd. of Educ., , 189 N.J. 381 (2007), Besler v. Board of Educ. Of West Windsor-Plainsboro Regional School Dist., , 201 N.J. 544 (2010), Abbott v. Burke, , 206 N.J. 332 (2011) Read: Education Education Family Law Importance: The New Jersey Supreme Court consistently has been at the forefront of matters involving family relationships. The issues it has addressed have been as varied as human nature itself. As early as 1971, the Court corrected the course that family law had been on and recognized the notion of marriage as a shared enterprise in which the spouse’s contributions are to be valued equally. Khalaf v. Khalaf, 58 N.J. 63 (1971). It went on to uphold the constitutionality of the equitable distribution statute, Painter v. Painter, 65 N.J. 196 (1974) and identified a non-vested pension plan with future monetary benefits earned during the marriage as within the marital estate. Kikkert v. Kikkert, 88 N.J. 4 (1981). In addition, recognizing that all relationships entitled to protection are not traditional marriages, the Court declared that committed same-sex couples must be afforded the same rights and benefits enjoyed by married opposite sex couples, Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 415 (2006) and permitted the enforcement of financial agreements between unmarried parties living together based on promises that had been made and expectations developed. Kozlowski v. Kozlowski, 80 N.J. 378 (1979).  Relevant Cases:, Khalaf v. Khalaf, , 58 N.J. 63 (1971), Painter v. Painter, , 65 N.J. 196 (1974), Kikkert v. Kikkert, , 88 N.J. 4 (1981), Lewis v. Harris, , 188 N.J. 415 (2006), Kozlowski v. Kozlowski, , 80 N.J. 378 (1979), State v. Kelly, , 97 N.J. 178 (1984), J.B. v. M.B., , 470 N.J. 9 (2001), Beck v. Beck, , 86 N.J. 480 (1981), VC v. MJB, , 163 N.J. 200 (2000), Moriarty v. Bradt, , 177 N.J. 84 (2003), IMO DC & DC Minors, , 203 N.J. 541 (2010), Williams v. Williams, , 59 N.J. 229 (1971), Lepis v. Lepis, , 83 N.J. 139 (1980), Newburgh v. Arrigo, , 88 N.J. 529 (1982), Lynn v. Lynn, , 91 N.J. 510 (1982), Gayet v. Gayet, , 92 N.J. 149 (1983), Innes v. Innes, , 117 N.J. 496 (1990), Kinsella v. Kinsella, , 150 N.J. 276 (1997), Crews v. Crews, , 164 N.J. 11 (2000), Mani v. Mani, , 183 N.J. 70 (2005), Fawzy v. Fawzy, , 199 N.J. 456 (2009), Bisbing v. Bisbing, , 230 N.J. 309 (2017), Baures v. Lewis, , 167 N.J. 91 (2001)   Read: Family Law Family Law Individual Rights Importance: While many people think of the United States Constitution, and particularly the first ten amendments that constitute the Bill of Rights, as the major source of legal protection of individual freedoms—such as free speech, freedom of religion, personal privacy rights and the right to due process of law—each state constitution is also an independent source of those rights. While the federal Constitution provides the basic guarantees that are enforced across the nation, each state is free in its own constitution to provide rights that exceed the minimum federal standard.  New Jersey in particular has a long tradition of interpreting the New Jersey Constitution in ways that are in keeping with the particular history and traditions of this State, and that often exceed the federal constitutional standard. Following are some examples. Relevant Cases:, State v. Schmid, , 84 N.J. 535 (1980), Mazdabrook Commons Homeowners' Association v. Khan, , 210 N.J. 482 (2012), Freedom from Religion Foundation V. Morris County Board Of Chosen Freeholders, , 235 N.J. 385 (2018), Ran-Dav's County Kosher, Inc. v. State, , 129 N.J. 141 (1992), Elmora Hebrew Center v. Fishman, , 125 N.J. 404 (1991), State v. Gregory, , 66 N.J. 510 (1975), Rodriguez v. Rosenblatt, , 58 N.J. 281 (1971), Right to Choose v. Byrne, , 91 N.J. 287 (1982), Quinlan, , 70 N.J. 10 (1976), Baby M, , 109 N.J. 396 (1988), V.C. v. M.J.B., , 163 N.J. 200 (2000) Read: Individual Rights Individual Rights Watch: Quinlan Municipal Law Importance: Up to the mid 20th century, citizens could not generally sue towns when they were injured or refused to carry out contracts. Now, such municipal immunity has largely disappeared as to contract and tort claims against municipal entities. So the law covering these kinds today of cases resembles the case law set forth in the sections on torts and contracts.   But some subjects remain unique to local government. What is the origin of home rule? Where do our towns get their right to pass ordinances that regulate people and businesses? When is local initiative barred by uniform state law?  Case law also enforces statutes governing citizens’ rights to attend public meetings and gain access to public records. And case law also governs the fairness of property tax assessments and the integrity of local officials.   The general trend in the law has been to give local governments more authority to undertake initiatives on behalf of their citizens. When in doubt, the Supreme Court has given the go ahead to local regulations, unless they violate some specific constitutional right, like the right to free speech or equality before the law or interfere with the requirements of a state statute. For example, over the past decades, the Court has authorized local rent control, requirements for soil removal or regulation of firearms discharge. In this way our Court has been quite supportive of local home rule.  Relevant Cases:, Inganamort v. Bor. of Ft. Lee, , 62 N.J. 521 (1973), Fred v. Mayor and Council of Old Tappan, , 10 N.J.515 (1952), Chester Township v. Panicucci, , 62 N.J. 94 (1973), Overlook Terrace Management Corp. v. Rent Control Bd.of West New York, , 71 N.J. 451 (1976), FMC Stores v. Bor. of Morris Plains, , 100 N.J. 418 (1985), Jantausch v. Bor. of Verona, , 24 N.J. 326 (1957), Switz v. Middletown Tp., , 23 N.J. 580 (1957), Thompson v. City of Atlantic City, , 190 N.J. 359 (2007), Driscoll v. Burlington Bristol Bridge Co., , 8 N.J. 433 (1952), Polillo v. Deane, , 74 N.J. 562 (1977), State v. Caoli, , 135 N..J. 252 (1994), Irval Realty, Inc. v. Bd. Of Public Utilities Commissioners, , 61 .N.J. 366 (1972), North Jersey Media Group v. Township of Lyndhurst, , 229 N.J. 541 (2017) Read: Municipal Law Municipal Law Premises Liability Importance: “Contractor sues Starbuck’s CEO after slipping on mansion floor.” “Trespassing teenager falls through skylight, sues property owner.” “Supermarket sued by shopper mugged in parking lot.” Headlines such as these while not common demonstrate the importance of Premise Liability Law in New Jersey. Simply because an accident occurred does not mean that the property or business owner is responsible for the injuries. What rights does a person have when entering onto another’s property? What duty should be imposed on the property owner?  Everyone has walked into a business, traveled over public sidewalks, been invited to a neighbor’s house, and perhaps engaged in an occasional trespass. All these routine activities have the potential of placing an individual in foreseeable harm. It follows that the law impose corresponding protections. The New Jersey Supreme Court initially confronted these questions by applying Common Law principles.   Under Common Law a plaintiff must establish the existence of a duty of care that was breached by the property owner, causing injury to plaintiff. Townsend v. Pierre, 221 N.J. 36 (2015). To determine if a duty existed the Court examined the relationship between the property owner and the person entering the premises. Why was this person there? Was a benefit conferred on the owner by the person or were both parties mutually benefited? Identifying the status of the parties became a determinative factor in establishing the duty. The extent of the duty depended on 2  whether the person entering the property was a business invitee, social guest (also referred to as a licensee) or trespasser.   Relevant Cases:, Townsend v. Pierre, , 221 N.J. 36 (2015), Taneian v. Meghrigian, , 15 N.J. 267 (1954), Handleman v. Cox, , 39 N.J .95 (1963), Egan v. Erie Railroad Co., , 29 N.J .243 (1959), Brett v. Great Am. Recreation Inc., , 144 N.J. 479, 508 (1996), Gonzalez v. Safe and Sound Security, , 185 N.J. 100 (2005), Taylor v. N.J. Highway Authority, , 22 N.J. 454 (1956), Butler v. Acme Markets, Inc., , 89 N.J. 270 (1982), Hopkins v. Fox and Lazo Realtors, , 132 N.J. 426 (1993), Parks v. Rogers, , 176 N.J. 491 (2003), Rowe v. Mazel Thirty LLC, , 209 N.J. 35 (2012), Yankho v. Fane, , 70 N.J. 528 (1976), Mirza v. Fimore Corp., , 92 N.J. 390 (1983), Luchejko v. City of Hoboken, , 207 N.J.191 (2011), Qian v. Toll Brothers, Inc., , 223 N.J. 124 (2015), McDaid v. Aztec West Condominium Association, , 234 N.J. 130 (2018), Vincitore v. N.J. Sports & Exposition Authority, , 169 N.J. 119, 125 (2001), Jerista v. Murray, , 185 N.J. 175 (2005) Read: Premises Liability Premises Liability Products Liability Importance: In few areas of the law has the New Jersey Supreme Court advanced the common law so definitively as in the field of product liability. Leading the way in the nation, our state Supreme Court re-prioritized society’s agenda to promote product safety, by providing a legal remedy to the consumers of defective goods. The modern law of Product Liability began as a response to transformative changes in the production and marketing of consumer goods during the first decades of the 20th Century. The small manufacturer whose products were personally inspected and selected by a series of individual buyers was replaced by the mass marketer. The buyer who was able to select both the manufacturer and the particular goods was replaced by the passive consumer who bought out of stock, knew nothing about production, nor was in a position to influence it. Moreover, people who suffered damage when mass marketed goods turned out to be defective were at an increasing disadvantage in their ability to be compensated for their loss.  Relevant Cases:   Read: Products Liability Products Liability Professional Responsibility and Discipline of Attorneys Importance: Under Article VI, section II, paragraph 3 of the 1947 State Constitution, the New Jersey Supreme Court has the exclusive authority to make Rules governing “the administration of all courts in the State,” governing “practice and procedure in all such courts,” and exercises “jurisdiction over the admission to the practice of law and the discipline of persons admitted.”   The New Jersey system for admission and discipline of attorneys is governed by the Court rules and not by bar associations or other entities. It is a system unique to New Jersey. The Supreme Court has established procedures to assure the qualification of attorneys admitted to practice in the state and regarding their character and fitness. It has also established a comprehensive system for the discipline of attorneys through local district ethics committees or Special Ethics Masters who hear disciplinary cases. Relevant Cases:, Opinion 39 of Committee on Advertising, , 197 NJ 66 (2008), Petrillo v Bachenberg, , 139 NJ 472 (1995), Madden v Delran Tp., , 126 NJ 591 (1992), Rodriguez v Rosenblatt, , 58 NJ 281 (1976), Jacob v Norris, , 128 NJ 10 (1992), Weiss v Carpenter, Bennett & Morrissey, , 143 NJ 420 (1996), Heher v Smith, Stratton Wise, , 143 NJ 448 (1996) and 170 NJ 213 (2001), Reardon v Marlayne, Inc., , 83 NJ 460 (1980), Dewey v RJ Reynolds Tobacco Co., , 109 NJ 201 (1988), Wilson, , 81 NJ 451 (1979), Hollendonner, , 102 NJ 21 (1985), American Trial Lawyers v N.J. Supreme Court, , 66 N.J. 258 (1974), Volsi, , 85 NJ 576 (1981), Committee on Advertising, , 197 NJ 66 (2008), Petrillo v Bachenberg, , 139 NJ 472 (1995), Madden v Delran Tp., , 126 NJ 591 (1992), Rodriguez v Rosenblatt, , 58 NJ 281 (1976), Jacob v Norris, , 128 NJ 10 (1992), Weiss v Carpenter, Bennett & Morrissey, , 143 NJ 420 (1996), Heher v Smith, Stratton Wise, , 143 NJ 448 (1996) and 170 NJ 213 (2001), Reardon v Marlayne, Inc., , 83 NJ 460 (1980), Wilson, , 81 NJ 451 (1979), Hollendonner, , 102 NJ 21 (1985), State v Rue, , 175 NJ, Friedland, Querques and Robbins, , 59 N.J. 209 (1971) Read: Professional Responsibility Professional Responsibility and Discipline of Attorneys The State Constitution Importance: The people of New Jersey have, in fact, two constitutions that provide for their governance and protect their rights. First, is the more familiar United States Constitution. Like the people in all fifty states, however, New Jerseyans also have their own state constitution that provides additional constitutional rules applicable only in their state. New Jersey has had its own state constitution since 1776, and with numerous changes, modifications, and additions over the years, this has led to our current New Jersey state constitution. The New Jersey Supreme Court has the final say on the meaning and application of our state constitution. When a contested court case raises a question regarding an interpretation of a provision of the state constitution, or how it applies to the facts of the case, the court must apply or interpret the constitution in order to decide the case. Such judicial decisions not only decide the specific case before the court but also serve as precedents to be applied to future questions regarding the meaning of that state constitutional provision. These judge-made interpretations, together with the text of the constitution itself, constitute the state constitutional law of our state. While these constitutional precedents are not written in stone, at times albeit highly unlikely, they can be overturned by future courts. Finally, it is in the area of constitutional law that courts are often called upon to protect a fundamental right of a citizen that has yet to be addressed by the legislature. When elected officials are unable to act, the courts are the only recourse available to the public.    Relevant Cases:, Peper v. Princeton University, , 77 N.J. 55, 389 A. 2d 465 (1978), Quinlan, , 70 N.J. 10, 355 A. 2d 647 (1976), Planned Parenthood of Central New Jersey v. Farmer, , 165 N.J. 609, 762 A. 2d 620 (2000), Right to Choose v. Byrne, , 91 N.J. 287, 450 A.2d 925 (1982), Lewis v. Harris, , 188 N.J. 415, 908 A. 2d 196 (2006), New Jersey Coalition Against the War in the Middle East v. J.M.B. Realty Corp., , 138 N.J. 326, 650 A. 2d 757 (1994), Comite Organizador de Trabajadores Agricolas (COTA) v. Molinelli, , 114 N.J. 87, 552 A. 2d 1003 (1999), Southern Burlington County NAACP v. Township of Mt. Laurel, , 67 N.J. 151, 336 A.2d 713 (1975), State v. Muhammad, , 145 N.J. 23, 678 A. 2d 164 (1996), Winberry v. Salisbury, , 5 N.J. 240, 74 A. 2d 406 (1950), Gallenthin Realty Development, Inc. v. Paulsboro, , 191 N.J. 344, 924 A.2d 447 (2007), State v. Gilmore, , 103 N.J. 508, 511 A.2d 1150 (1986), Robinson v. Cahill, , 303 A.2d 273, 62 N.J. 473 (1973), Abbott v. Burke, , 495 A.2d 376, 100 N.J. 269 (1985) Read: State Constitution The State Constitution Watch: Robinson v Cahill Zoning and Planning Importance: For more than five decades, New Jersey’s Supreme Court has been looked to by courts across the nation for how best to accommodate the many interests that come into competition (some might say clash) when real estate is developed. Given New Jersey’s status as the most densely populated state in the United States, the potential for objectors to any land use application isn’t small. Most disputes are resolved before local planning and zoning boards, yet many find their way to the Superior Court where trial judges attempt to apply the law as fairly as possible. When the losing party appeals, some of those decisions find their way to our state’s highest court.  Relevant Cases:, Ward v. Scott, , 11 N.J. 117 (1952), Kramer v. Bd. of Adjustment, , 45 N.J. 68 (1965), Kirsch Holding Co. v. Manalapan, , 59 N.J. 241 (1971), Southern Burlington County N.A.A.C.P. v. Mount Laurel Tp., , 67 N.J. 151, 187 (1975), Mount Laurel II, , 92 N.J. 158 (1983), Home Builders League v. Berlin, , 81 N.J. 127 (1979), Medici v. BPR Company, , 101 N.J. 1 (1987), PRB Enterprises, Inc., v. S. Brunswick Planning Board, , 105 N.J. 1 (1987), Riggs v. Long Beach Township, , 109 N.J. 601 (1988), Sica v. Board of Adjustment, , 127 N.J. 152 (1992), Wyzkowski v. Rizas, , 132 N.J. 509 (1993), Coventry Square, Inc. v. Westwood ZBA, , 138 N.J. 285 (1994), New Jersey Shore Builders Association v. the Township of Jackson, , 199 N.J. 38 (2009), Grippenburg v. Township of Ocean, , 220 N.J. 239 (2015) Read: Zoning and Planning Zoning and Planning Watch: NAACP v Mt Laurel  
  • Original Courtroom, Overview The following are photographs of the old Supreme Court courtroom and conference room, which were located in the Statehouse Annex adjacent to the Statehouse. The annex was built in the late 1920s and originally housed the Judiciary and the New Jersey State Library and New Jersey State Museum. The old courtroom and conference room have been converted into hearing rooms for the state Senate and Assembly. The conference room includes details such as stained-glass windows embossed with old court seals and dark wood paneled walls with a carved state seal. These stained-glass windows, embossed with the seals of the old courts prior to enactment of the 1947 constitution, are now hidden behind heavy curtains in the old Supreme Court conference room. Virtual Tour of the NJ Statehouse Annex (video) Part 1 Virtual Tour of the NJ Statehouse Annex (video) Part 2, Original Courtroom, Carousel Image Preview Original Courtroom from Front Original Courtroom from Front Carousel Image Preview Original Courtroom From Back Original Courtroom from Back Carousel Image Preview Clock at Back Entrance Clock at Back Entrance Carousel Image Preview Bookshelf Inside Original Courtroom Bookshelf Inside Original Courtroom Carousel Image Preview Doors to Conference Original Room Doors to Conference Original Room Carousel Image Preview Double Doors at Back of Original Courtroom Double Doors at Back of Original Courtroom  Carousel Image Preview Bookcase in Original Courtroom Bookcase in Original Courtroom Previous Next, Original Conference Room, Carousel Image Preview Hallway Between Original Courtroom and Conference Room Hallway Between Original Courtroom and Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Seating In Original Conference Room Seating In Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Ceiling Details Inside Original Conference Room Ceiling Details Inside Original Conference Room  Carousel Image Preview Original Conference Table  Original Conference Table  Carousel Image Preview Bookshelf in Original Conference Room Bookshelf in Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Wood Paneling and Lamp Inside Original Conference Room Wood Paneling and Lamp Inside Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Closeup of Law Books in Original Conference Room Closeup of Law Books in Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview New Jersey State Seal Carved from Wood New Jersey State Seal Carved from Wood Carousel Image Preview Reading Chairs in Original Conference Room Reading Chairs in Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Reference Library in Old Conference Room Reference Library in Old Conference Room Previous Next, Art & Fixtures, Carousel Image Preview Stained Glass Window Depicting NJ State Seal Stained Glass Window Depicting NJ State Seal Carousel Image Preview Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Supreme Court Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Supreme Court Carousel Image Preview Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Appellate Court Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Appellate Court Carousel Image Preview Stained Glass Seal Quoting Psalm 24:1 Stained Glass Seal Quoting Psalm 24:1 Carousel Image Preview Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Court of Chancery Stained Glass Seal of New Jersey Court of Chancery Carousel Image Preview Fireplace in Original Conference Room Fireplace in Original Conference Room Carousel Image Preview Ornate Fireplace Tools Ornate Fireplace Tools  Carousel Image Preview Light Fixture Hanging from Original Courtroom Ceiling Light Fixture Hanging from Original Courtroom Ceiling Previous Next
  • R.J. Hughes Justice Complex Architectural Background, Body Background as written by Thomas L. Doremus, 2020, architect of the R.J. Hughes Justice Complex, Introduction, I joined The Grad Partnership as an Associate Architect early in 1977 and was assigned to work on the Justice Complex project. The partner in charge of that project was David Dibner, and the Project Architect, who was also the Project Manager, was Fredric Rosen. He was responsible for the design of the facility and all of its detailing and furnishing. I worked under Fred and was assigned responsibility for much of the detailing of the courthouse block and its courthouses. But everything I did was directed and approved by Fred, and he remains the overall designer for the Hughes Justice Complex. Although the team was remarkably small for such a large project, other architects with major influence on the design were John Doran, Construction Manager on the Grad side of the joint venture; Joan Humphreys, architectural designer and detailer; Eunice Chan, Interior Designer for the facility; and David Zugale, who joined us on occasion to offer design and rendering support. There were also Drafters, an occupation that hardly exists anymore in these days of computer drawing. A joint venture between The Grad Partnership and J. Robert Hillier Architects of Camden had been formed to design and build this important state facility. To my personal knowledge, all of the design was accomplished at The Grad Partnership's offices at One Gateway Center in Newark. Although I believe personnel from the Hillier firm attended monthly progress meetings with the client, I have no personal knowledge of their participation, being told that they would take responsibility for carrying out the construction, once the documents had been prepared by Grad. I never met anyone from their office that I can recall., Photo Gallery, Carousel Image Preview RJH Exterior 1 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 2 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 3 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 4 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 5 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 6 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 7 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 8 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 9 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Exterior RJH Complex 10 These are views of the exterior of the justice complex during construction and after completion. Carousel Image Preview Interior RJH Complex 1 Court room Carousel Image Preview Interior RJH Complex 2 Carousel Image Preview Interior RJH Complex 3 The Conference room under construction Previous Next Carousel Image Preview Interior RJH Complex 4 The Conference room on the fourth floor Carousel Image Preview Interior RJH Complex 5 The Court room under construction Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 1 Outside the Supreme Court courtroom Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 2 On the north wing looking up from the mezzanine Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 3 The view toward the rear of the Supreme Court courtroom Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 4 Looking up toward the glass roof from outside the Supreme Court courtroom (upside down) Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 5 Outside the fourth floor conference center looking toward the north wing Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 6 Outside the Supreme Court courtroom Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 7 In front of the current A room in the conference center Carousel Image Preview Architecture RJH Complex 8 The Supreme Court conference room Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 9 On the eight floor bridge looking toward the Chief Justice’s chambers Carousel Image Preview Architect RJH Complex 10 The office of the administrative director of the courts Previous Next, Summary, This is a review of the design process that resulted in the construction of the Richard Hughes Justice Complex in Trenton, NJ between 1977 and 1982. lt is based on my recollections as an architectural designer for The Grad Partnership. Most of the drawings were done by myself for presentation to the design committee as work progressed. There was a commitment among all of the design personnel to produce an exceptional facility appropriate to the status of New Jersey's judicial system and the state constitution of 1947. We agreed that the building should be comfortable and efficient for those who would occupy it, be as transparent and inviting as possible to the public and be monumental in standing for the distinctive qualities that make New Jersey the state that it is today., Purpose and Precedent, When I joined the design team as an Associate Architect early in 1977, the building program had been defined as a facility housing all of the functions of the Judiciary in New Jersey including the Supreme Court and one new Appellate Courtroom. In addition, the Department of the Attorney General was to be housed within the complex. Soon, the Department of the Public Advocate was added as well, in the face of much resistance from that agency which felt that it worked best as individual offices distributed throughout communities within Trenton. But those charged with preparing the program wanted a centralized operation, one where information could be traded quickly and informal meetings would be easy to arrange. Essentially, the Justice Complex was to be a building full of lawyers and its design was meant to ease discussion and encourage early settlement of legal issues. The result would be the largest office building in New Jersey at that time, about a million square feet. It was recognized that the Complex would have a symbolic role as the home of the Supreme Court in its role as interpreter of the Constitution of the State of New Jersey. The Courtroom had previously been located within the State House and would now stand on its own as a separate branch of government. Given this importance, the design team considered as precedents other buildings that housed supreme courts among the states as well as the U.S. Supreme Court building in Washington D.C. That building was not seriously taken as a model for New Jersey's new facility. In spite of its steel-frame construction, up-to-date for its date of completion in 1935, the Greek Revival-style massing and details were intended to match its neighbors in the District of Columbia where strong constraints were in place regarding the appearance of government buildings. Although the overall facilities are not very different in kind from what was proposed for Trenton (four-stories of offices surrounding a public courtroom), the symbolism of its function seemed to us to be overdone, even melodramatic, more suited to a centralized government than to a democracy. The courtroom itself, although meant to be open to the public, was buried deep within the marble pile behind an overscaled phalanx of Corinthian columns, hardly accessible let alone transparent. The seated Justices, as typically pictured through courtroom sketch artists, appeared to be uncomfortably high above the proceedings, peering over their substantial bench from immense chairs that all but devoured them. They were depicted leaning to and fro, trying to see past each other in three angled tightly­ spaced ranks of chairs. The design team favored a very comfortable environment for the New Jersey court to pursue its public duties. Although direct access by the public must of necessity be limited, we wanted the Courtroom to be as transparent as possible, both to express the openness of the deliberations to public scrutiny and, ideally, to introduce as much daylighting as possible into the space so that the occupants would have a sense of time passing as well as a connection to the world outside. The other state government buildings in Trenton, particularly the State House, were scattered around a neighborhood in no particular order or hierarchy in a variety of styles and sizes. It must be said that the State House itself, sadly, did not do much to represent a state with the history, importance and wealth of New Jersey. Unlike the impressive capitol buildings of neighboring states, New Jersey's is relatively small and unimposing, especially from the adjoining sidewalk where the public entrance is located. There is very little lawn or park around it, and it is approached much like a local library or bank. It may be thought fortuitous that it wouldn't be visible from the new Justice Complex which was to be located on a relatively tight site a block or so to the south across from Trenton's historic Trent House. The core of the State House, from 1790 and not visible from outside, is the third-oldest capitol building among the states, only Maryland's and Virginia's preceding it. Virginia's capitol in Richmond housed its Supreme Court of Appeals on an upper floor above the assembly chamber. It was designed under the influence of Thomas Jefferson, third President of the United States, who himself practiced architecture. Jefferson was very cognizant of designing buildings for a new form of democratic government, and studied the latest trends of thought among European builders, primarily those in Paris. Although access to Greece itself was limited by its Turkish occupation, models from classical Roman times in the Greek style could be easily found in France, along with plans and elevations of ancient works published in books. One of the local buildings, called "Maison Caree" in Nimes, was recommended to Jefferson by his Parisian contact, the architect Charles-Louis Clerisseau, as a model of Greek democracy. Jefferson's design for Virginia's Capitol reflected his strong preference towards a new style for the new form of government. It would be constructed in much the same way that its precedent had been. Methods of building had not changed very much in thousands of years and there was no reason for a new building to look very different from an older one of similar purpose. However, a great transformation was to occur in just a few decades. By the later part of' the nineteenth century, new products like structural steel and reinforced concrete would join new methods of servicing buildings mechanically such as elevators, escalators , heating, cooling, ventilating, lighting and supply of power made available new types of facilities, public, commercial and residential. The traditional ways of building were brought into question. New Jersey was part of that industrialization of' society in a definitive way. The state prospered from the transformation of its manufacturing processes and became a source for many different products, including chemicals, pharmaceuticals, textiles and even structural steel and locomotives for a while. By the middle of the twentieth century, when its new state constitution was adopted, New Jersey's appellation as "The Garden State" had become something of' a joke to those who drove through the state on its up- to- date highways on their way between New York and Philadelphia because most of what they saw there was industrial in nature. It was these structures - bridges, towers, viaducts in steel or concrete ­ that brought another influence into our project. Just as New Jersey had brought itself into the modern age through its new constitution, the building where that constitution was to be interpreted and maintained would be just as up- to-date as we could make it., The Site, As has been mentioned, there was no coherent plan for the capitol buildings in Trenton. Vast areas of surface parking covered what might have been landscaped parks and plazas for the government center. The Justice Complex, therefore, needed to be self-contained, imposing by itself without a larger vision. The tightness of the site made an approach through landscaped grounds impractical. It was decided that the courthouses could be placed in a block of their own which might be embraced by the much larger office facilities, arranged as a background. If that block were raised (at a scale inconceivable to Thomas Jefferson), the space below it could form a sizable indoor room that would be suitable for announcements, events and exhibitions. Views to the Delaware River passing not far away would be greatly enhanced for both the public block and the offices behind. Since the site sloped down to the south and east, parking could be enclosed in a podium below the offices with landscaped areas above., Function and Themes, The new facility would address a need for space perceived as accompanying two large new tax initiatives in New Jersey: an income tax and permitting casino gambling in Atlantic City with expected revenues. So a tax courtroom was added to the stack of public rooms, as well as a large, divisible conference center meant to be accessible to the public without their entering the agency spaces. The office floors were to be as flexible as possible, easily modified as necessary for people sitting at desks with more or less privacy through partitions of different heights. Any ceremonial events which might be expected at such a facility could be held in the large open public space on the ground floor below the courthouse block. Clear separation of public and private functions would be enhanced by physical distance between them in the form of a continuous skylighted atrium crossed by bridges to connect the floors. Open galleries along this atrium on each floor would enhance encounters between staff members from the three main government agencies: the Department of the Attorney General, the Department of the Public Advocate and the Judiciary. The statues of Justice blindfolded holding a pair of scales, so familiar from hundreds of courthouses around the nation, represent a duality characteristic of such facilities. They express an ideal of disinterested judgment between two arguments, one made by the state as a charge and the other as a response by the citizen involved or their representative. Thus, the Judiciary oversees the judicial operations of the Department of the Attorney­ General and the Department of the Public Advocate, which represent opposing sides. But this balance, in operation, is equivalent rather than equal. The two departments exist in very different relations to the public and the Attorney-General's offices are far larger than those of the Public Advocate, which preferred not to be incorporated into the complex in the first place. So there is a quality of symmetry/ asymmetry, of equivalence rather than equality in the nature of the program. This is a theme that would have a great influence in the design of the building. Pedagogy was another theme that was felt to be important, especially in configuring the spaces in the courthouse block. The symbolic nature of the Supreme Court invited a focus on the structure of legal procedure within New Jersey. Visitors to the complex were expected, including public school students on excursions, and if the building could explain itself through its layout and composition, it would enhance their experience. This was in resonance with the overall theme of transparency in the workings of the laws of the state., Character of the Environment, The design team had agreed that the new facility must reflect the tradition of equal justice for all throughout the United States, while embodying New Jersey's status as a modern industrial society. The 1947 state constitution was regarded proudly as a model for a democratic society and, in fact, program spaces were to be set aside for visitors from other states and nations to observe the application of New Jersey's laws to contemporary situations. Chief Justices Richard Hughes and, after 1978, Robert Wilentz took the lead in demanding a modern facility of a stature and quality suited to the state's view of itself as an up-to-date democracy prepared for the challenges of the upcoming 21s century through its legal structures. To that end, a method was devised, along with Governor Brendan Byrne, of financing the proposed building through bonds floated by Mercer County rather than try to pass legislation through the State Assembly where the traditional conflict between the northern and southern parts of the state would most likely raise costs. The bonds were set to mature after thirty years, so in 2012 the state purchased the Justice Complex from Mercer County for one dollar. The single quality that would determine the appearance of the new building was "silver", meaning light in both substance and materials. Simple, clean geometric forms would predominate with spare, thin surfaces and a minimal of detailing as appropriate. The inevitably immense size of the office block would impact its neighborhood as a shining background articulated with a simple grid. The interior would be lit through ribbons of high, wide windows that brought in as much daylighting as could be managed while maximizing the efficiency of mechanically tempered ventilating air. The courthouses would sit centrally stacked in a block above a communal entrance plaza minimally screened from the exterior by the thinnest possible glazing. This plaza would be inviting to all by means of transparency. The organization of the two major courtrooms, Supreme and Appellate, along with the Tax Courtroom and conference center would be organized on alternating single and double-height spaces aligned with the fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth floors, with the Supreme Courtroom at the top and its associated support spaces, including the offices of the Chief Justice and his staff, adjoining on floors cantilevered out over the plaza., Structure and Skin, The primary stylistic trope of Jefferson's Virginia Capitol, the 1935 U.S. Supreme Court Building and just about all neoclassical/Federal-style buildings is the classical colonnade. For the ancient Greeks who invented it, it represented the act of construction itself as a sacred endeavor when done for the purpose of serving a god. In the high Classical age during the Fifth Century B.C., the colonnade was codified in marble according to the importance of the gods that the building was dedicated to. Three orders of details-Doric, Ionic and Corinthia - are seen as the basis for standards of carving that commemorated the original wooden columnar structures of the older Greeks. For Jefferson, a dedicated student of Classical architecture as it was known in the 18'h century, the structure of the colonnade represented the soundness of government itself. As you approach the Capitol in Richmond, it stands above on a hill at the top of a wide, stone stair-although this was not the way the building was always entered. Today, the visitor sees first the great colonnade above and then continues to pass through the phalanx of shafts before entering the simple, rectangular block of the building, rendered in white stucco over brick with decorated marble surrounds at the windows which, parenthetically, were decidedly not part of the ancient kit of parts. The structure of the new Justice Complex with its great courthouse block overhanging a public plaza, was not anything that would have been conceived either by the ancient Greek builders or by Jefferson. The overhanging is achieved through a cantilever, a means of supporting an elevated load at one end only. Cantilevering at a modest scale is possible with wood, as the overhanging eaves of many wooden roofs demonstrate. But at the scale of the Justice Complex, structural steel with great strength in tension is required, and that is a material of modern times that makes our contemporary structures buildable. The support of the courthouse block is achieved through two orders of cantilevered trusses. A pair of each, one full story tall, connect at the outermost northwest corners of the fourth and seventh floors and support the fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth floors at their bottoms and tops. These outrigger trusses are themselves held in place by pairs of two-story trusses that run through the four column structures which bear the total weight of the courthouse block. Structural steel must be fireproofed, so it usually can't be seen directly. At the Justice Complex, the design team decided to cover the fireproofed structure with silver aluminum in a way that reflected the configuration of the steel members. The quadruple sets of four columns would be circled by a thin wrap of aluminum skin, while the trusses, where visible, would be covered in folded wrappers that revealed their disposition. In this way, an analog to the Jeffersonian Federal celebration of structure is applied to express the scale and power of the judicial state. The articulation contrasts with the simple flat background of the office block behind., Geometry, The courtrooms themselves-Supreme, Appellate and Tax-would be stacked in a hierarchy. The spaces would be carved out of a square prism of space which, intersected by the truss structure, would be truncated at the ends to form an almost equilateral octagon. The Supreme Court would occupy the entire octagon, day lit from the four truncated corners by a wall of glass. The Justices would sit at an arced bench occupying one quadrant of the room, with the public galleries opposite within one-half of the space. The appellant would stand at the exact geometric center of the block behind a rostrum, expressing the position of the citizen at the center of government in a democracy. This format would be copied to some extent in the double-height Appellant Courtroom which was to be cruciform at the ceiling with triangular lobbies carved out at the corners. Single story preparation rooms at two of the glazed sides would reduce the floor of the courtroom to a rectangle, again with a three-judge bench opposing a public gallery. Once again, the appellant occupied the center on a rostrum. The single-story Tax Court would repeat the floor plan of the Appellate Courtroom below it. So all three courtrooms in the Justice Complex would share a common configuration adjusted for the hierarchy of the proceedings taking place within them. The conference center at the fourth floor was where most jurisprudence was expected to take place. Formal court proceedings are a small fraction of the business of justice, and it is always more efficient for an issue to reach settlement through negotiation, if that can be achieved. Visible through the trusses, the hierarchy of the courtrooms can be readily discerned from any of the galleries surrounding the atrium, and the building itself can be used to elucidate the processes of justice to visitors., Approach and Circulation, At the entrance level, continuity between exterior and interior was maximized by the details of the encompassing wall panels and the pa\ing. The structural grid of the office block is based on a module of thirty feet by thirty feet, and the wall panels repeat this module in the joints between. At the boundary, a glass wall provides the separation from the exterior off the main grid to reinforce the lightness of the barrier. This wall is built of thick tempered glass braced by glass fins, raised in two ranks -with an intermediate supporting beam. At the atrium, additional ranks of glass rise to the skylight at the roof. The supporting beams are recessed to allow the surface of the barrier to slide past as a continuous, thin membrane. The ceiling below the overhanging courthouse block, as well as the white fill-in panels at the ends, are detailed to let the glass slice through as needed with minimal detailing. The pattern in the granite paving is based on a three-foot grid with two nine-foot-wide paths on the axes of the twin approaches. This pattern is not interrupted by the glass barrier. As the paths reach the center of the entrance hall, the pavement gradually expands until they intersect at a nine - foot square paver which is directly beneath the rostra in the Supreme, Appellate and Tax Courtrooms above. From here, the Department of the Public Advocate was approached directly on the eastern side of the hall, while escalators on the east and south respectively led up to elevator banks accessing the Judiciary and the Department of the Attorney General. Elevators open on each level to a gallery facing the courthouses across a skylighted atrium. The courthouses themselves, as public spaces, are approached by v,ide bridges that cross the atrium and then through the encompassing trusses in a manner similar to Jefferson's Capitol in Richmond. The representation of structure in this case is a modern steel truss rather than a classical colonnade, but the spatial experience is the same., Surface and Details, The major components of the Justice Complex are the structural system, the skin cladding the office block and the courthouse, the paving at the entrance level and the ceiling above the entrance hall, suspended from the courthouse block above. These components were meant to be seen as independent, coherent systems and so were detailed with clear separations between them and an emphasis on articulation and how they fit together. The minimal articulation of the aluminum cladding panels emphasizes the thinness of the silver skin, a light wrapping around the eight stories of interior space. Where this skin is penetrated, primarily at the bridges between the offices and the courthouse, it drops away to reveal a white surface against the floor slabs of the office. Because the state required operable windows in the offices, opening ventilation slots were incorporated below the windows, although the mechanical systems in such a large space were designed to take care of all ventilation requirements. On the courthouse block, with its stack of single- and double-height rooms, the pattern varies with glazing optimized to reveal the supporting trusses behind. The main exterior facades on the north and west are continuous silver and glass, while the sides facing the interior galleries have a white infill on the exterior side of the glazed wall. The trusses are revealed here as well. The expression of structure at the courthouse block is probably the most important style element of the complex. The four quadruple columns are wrapped in cylinders of thin aluminum that are visibly penetrated by the truss elements reaching in to the columns. The fireproofed truss elements are wrapped in folded aluminum sheaths that represent the structural shape of the steel members inside. The consistency of the supporting structure is rendered clear and visible. The aluminum ceiling suspended below the courthouses and extending beyond the glass wall to the edge of the overhanging block outside are detailed as white ribbons with reveals between to emphasize the axial approach below. Where the courthouses occupy the floors above, the reveals are dropped. All of the detailing is meant to reinforce a consistent perception of space as one approaches the courthouse. Furthermore, the hierarchy of judicial action, from conference level through tax and appellate functions to the Supreme Court as final adjudicator is communicated through the ceiling heights and disposition of space. The Supreme Courtroom has special finishes, including marble sheathing on the walls and carved-glass windows., Special Spaces, On the seventh floor of the courthouse block is the office suite for the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court. This includes a large corner office facing the Delaware River, a personal conference room with associated administrative areas, and an elliptical Supreme Court Conference Room where the Justices can meet privately outside of formal proceedings. Chambers for several Associate Justices with their accompanying administrative space were also planned, as was an extensive library for the Court itself. The Administrative Officer of the Court was assigned an office on the sixth floor. On the first floor of the south office block, one level above the entrance, a cafeteria was provided with access to the landscaping above the parking garage. Otherwise, the great amount of open floor space was left to be as flexible as possible for the changing needs of the judicial offices over time.
  • About Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex, The New Jersey Supreme Court sits in the Richard J. Hughes Justice Complex in Trenton. The eight-story, steel and aluminum structure was completed and opened by then - Gov. Brendan T. Byrne in January 1982. The 1.2 million-square-foot complex also houses the Administrative Office of the Courts, the Department of Law and Public Safety and the Public Defender. The building is named for the only person in New Jersey history to serve as governor and chief justice. Hughes, who died in December 1992 at the age of 83, was governor of New Jersey from 1962 to 1970 and served as chief justice from 1973 to 1979. From 1929 until 1982, the Supreme Court sat a short distance away in the Statehouse Annex, where standing lawyers looked down on seated justices in a space known for its poor lighting and acoustics. The old courtroom is now a meeting room for legislative committees. Planning for the justice complex began in 1977 and construction began the following year. The main portion of the building forms a "V" around a center cube that holds the Supreme Court courtroom, two additional courtrooms and office/conference space. Indoor bridges connect the offices on the fourth, fifth, seventh and eighth floors. The main entrance to the building leads into the lobby/atrium, which is open through 10 stories to a skylight on the roof. Arguments in the new Supreme Court courtroom were first held on March 21, 1983. The courtroom was formally dedicated on April 15, 1983 during a ceremony attended by about 90 federal and state court judges and officials, executive branch officials, members of the Legislature, and representatives of the bar, contractors, and state employee unions. U.S. Supreme Court Justice William J. Brennan Jr., a former New Jersey trial court judge who also sat on the New Jersey Supreme Court from 1952 until 1956, then-New Jersey Chief Justice Robert N. Wilentz, and then - Gov. Thomas H. Kean spoke. Brennan and Hughes were seated at the bench with members of the Supreme Court. The 10,800-square-foot Supreme Court courtroom features a 21-foot tall ceiling, sloping to 18 feet in the center, a 22.5-foot high skylight, polished walls fashioned from Vermont marble and etched glass created by glass artist Benoit Gilsoul. The bench, counsel's tables and podium were crafted from African mahogany veneer. There are two sets of bookcases, each seven feet tall, on either side behind the bench, and there are 80 upholstered theater-style chairs in curved rows on either side of the main entrance. Perhaps some of the most interesting characteristics of the justice complex are its artwork, specifically the life-size bronze sculptures by New Jersey native J. Seward Johnson, a scion of the Johnson & Johnson pharmaceutical conglomerate. Three works by sculptor Beverly Pepper, "Mute Metaphor," "Symbiotic Marker," and "Primary Presence," are located in the lobby of the justice complex, and a bust of Brennan is displayed in the glass breezeway between the Supreme Court courtroom and lobby on the eighth floor. The bust, which was sculpted by Jon Robert Bailey, was dedicated on Jan. 30, 2001. For a full story, written by the building architect, on how and why the R. J. Hughes building was constructed - please visit our R.J. Hughes Justice Complex Architectural Background R.J. Hughes Architectural page .  Photo Gallery R.J.H. Justice Complex Carousel One
  • Motion Day Schedule 2024-2025, SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, It is ORDERED that for the court year commencing July 1, 2024 and ending June 30, 2025, motions in all trial courts (including the Tax Court) shall be heard on Fridays or as otherwise provided by a judge pursuant to 1:6-2- Form of Motion; Hearing Rule 1 :6-2(b), except that motions to be argued in the Law Division of Superior Court shall be heard on the following days: Friday July 5, 2024  Friday July 19, 2024  Friday August 2, 2024  Friday August 16, 2024  Friday August 30, 2024  Friday September 13, 2024 Friday September 27, 2024 Friday October 11, 2024  Friday October 25, 2024  Friday November 8, 2024  Friday November 22, 2024  Friday December 6, 2024 Friday December 20, 2024 Friday January 3, 2025  Friday January 17, 2025  Friday January 31, 2025  Friday February 14, 2025  Friday February 28, 2025  Friday March 14, 2025  Friday March 28, 2025  Friday April 11, 2025  Friday April 25, 2025  Friday May 9, 2025  Friday May 23, 2025  Friday June 6, 2025  Thursday June 19, 2025  Dated: July 5, 2023
  • Court Holidays and Recesses 2024-2025, SUPREME COURT OF NEW JERSEY, It is ORDERED that the schedule of legal holidays and court recesses for the trial division of the Superior Court and for the Tax Court for the court year commencing July I, 2024 and ending June 30, 2025, is as follows: Monday, July 1, 2024  First Day of 2024-2025 Court Year  Thursday, July 4, 2024  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, September 2, 2024  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, October 14, 2024  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Tuesday, November 5, 2024  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, November 11, 2024  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday,  November 25, 26, and 27, 2024 Statewide Judicial College  (Emergent Matters Only)  Thursday, November 28, 2024 Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Wednesday, December 25, 2024 Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Thursday, December 26, 2024 through Tuesday, December 31, 2024  Court Recess (Emergent Matters Only) Wednesday, January 1, 2025  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, January 20, 2025 Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, February 17, 2025  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Friday, April 18, 2025 Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Monday, May 26, 2025  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Friday, June 20, 2025  Legal Holiday (Emergent Matters Only)  Tuesday, July 1, 2025 First Day of2025-2026 Court Year Dated: July 5, 2023
  • Secure Sites Portal, Welcome to the Secure Sites Portal
  • All Docketed Tax Court Cases, Local Property Tax Cases Docketed Lists, Local Property Tax Cases Docketed Local Property Tax Cases Docketed PDF - May 30, 2025 Local Property Tax Cases Docketed XLSX - May 30, 2025 Open Local Property Tax Cases Open Local Property Tax Cases PDF - May 30, 2025 Open Local Property Tax Cases XLSX - May 30, 2025, State Tax Cases Docketed Lists, State Tax Cases Docketed State Tax Cases Docketed PDF - May 30, 2025 State Tax Cases Docketed XLSX - May 30, 2025 Open State Tax Cases Open State Tax Cases PDF - May 30, 2025 Open State Tax Cases XLSX - May 30, 2025, Tax Docket Years, Category List of Local Property Tax Judgments Archived Local Property Tax Cases Docket Lists Years All 2025 2024 2023 2022 2021 2020 2019 2018 2017 2016 2015 2014 2013 2012 2011 2010 2009 2008 Apply Filters List Local Property Tax Judgments April 2025 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments April 2025 Local Property Tax Judgments March 2025 Local Property Tax Judgments March 2025 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments February 2025 Local Property Tax Judgments February 2025 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments January 2025 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments January 2025 Local Property Tax Judgments December 2024 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments December 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments November 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments November 2024 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments October 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments October 2024 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments September 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments September 2024 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments August 2024 (xlsx version) Local Property Tax Judgments August 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments July 2024 Local Property Tax Judgments July 2024 (xlsx version) Pagination 1 Go to page 2 2 Go to page 3 3 Go to last page 11 Last page Go to next page > Next page Showing 1 to 20 of 208 items
  • Student Resources, The Supreme Court - Students & Families United States Supreme Court offer students, families, and teachers activities focused on the history and knowledge of the government. The activities vary from booklets to games and puzzles. Founded in 2009 by Justice Sandra Day O’Connor, iCivics - Student Games iCivics is a non-profit civic education seeking higher learning in young students. Teachers will find innovative ways to engage students in civic democracy through games and other educational resources. Ben's Guide - GPO Ben’s Guide is an online learning tool about the Federal and U.S. Government. Created by the Government Publishing Office, there are different learning levels and games designed for varying age brackets. For instance, preschoolers learn about apprenticeship while 14-aged-plus students join the Master's Level Learning Page - 14+ Students master level learning adventures .  Law for Kids - Arizona Law for Kids was created by the Arizona Bar Foundation. It combines law games and classroom education in a friendly way to help young students be more aware of their lawful rights. Parents can also be active in their children’s law education by Law for Kids - Parent Page creating an account .  Law Facts for Kids Law Facts for Kids provides definitions and breakdowns of laws in simple terms for younger kids to understand. Kids in the House Kids in the House is an educational website provided by the U.S. Clerk’s Office of the House of Representatives. It supplies information about the U.S. Government legislative branch to all students.  New Jersey Statehouse - Main Page NJ Statehouse assists students in physical and virtual tour guides and sessions around the State House and other capitol buildings. New Jersey Statehouse - Tours Check the site for more information on session dates and times.
  • Complex Business Litigation Program, Start End Issue - Any - Additional Insured Arbitration Attorney Fees Auto Breach of Contract Breach of Duty of Loyalty Breach of Fiduciary Duty Breach of Warranty Business Judgment Rule Buyout Cancellation CEPA Civil Conspiracy Collateral Source Rule Commercial General Liability Commercial Litigation Computer/Software Related Issues Condominium Act Conflict of Interest Conflict/Choice of Law Construction Consumer Fraud Contract Interpretation Conversion Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Covenants (Restrictive, not to Compete/Solicit) Custodial/Statutory Receiver Damages Discovery Issues/Motions Dissolution Economic Loss Doctrine Employment Contract Employment Status Environmental Experts Fair Dealing Foreclosure Forum Issues Fraud Fraudulent Inducement Indemnification Insurance Jurisdictional Issues LAD Lemon Law Merger Negligent Misrepresentation Patents Personal Injury Protection (PIP) Piercing the Corporate Veil Private Employment Agency Act Products Liability Professional Negligence/Malpractice Promissory Estoppel Quantum Meruit Quasi-Contract Racketeering Racketeering Real Estate Real Estate Reformation Rescission Sealing of Court Records Securities Shareholder Issues Specific Performance Statute of Limitations Statute of Repose Statutory Interpretation Subpoenas Subrogation Successor Liability Suspicious Activity Report Privilege Tortious Interference Trade Secrets Trademark UCC Unfair Competition Unjust Enrichment Valuation Waiver WARN Act Witnesses Workers Compensation Wrongful Termination All Search Apply Filters CAM-L-2500-21 - D’elia v. Martinez, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   May 2, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Breach of Contract Fraud Conversion Unjust Enrichment Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Tortious Interference, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Polansky, P.J.Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, CAM-L-2500-21 MRS-L-1627-23 - Holder v. Mroue, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   April 1, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Breach of Contract Fraud, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, DeAngelis, P.J. Ch., Referenced Opinion ID, MRS-L-1627-23 SSX-L-469-24 - Franek v. Twp. of Wantage, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   March 28, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Discovery Issues/Motions, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, DeAngelis, P.J. Ch., Referenced Opinion ID, SSX-L-469-24 MRS-L-700-24 - First Environment Inc. v. Delta Environmental Services, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   March 25, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, CEPA Tortious Interference Unfair Competition, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, DeAngelis, P.J. Ch., Referenced Opinion ID, MRS-L-700-24 PAS-L-2441-22 - Wiggins Plastic, Inc. v. Cty. of Passaic, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Feb. 6, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Discovery Issues/Motions, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Del Sardo, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, PAS-L-2441-22 CAM-L-2934-20 - Shah v. Shroff, et al., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Jan. 21, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Discovery Issues/Motions, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Polansky, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, CAM-L-2934-20 MON-L-002754-20 - Ranga Bhoomi, LLC v. Sequoia Training and Nutrition Consultants, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Jan. 13, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Breach of Contract Conversion Fraud Promissory Estoppel Unjust Enrichment, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Cagan, J.S.C., Referenced Opinion ID, MON-L-002754-20 PAS-L-000712-24 - Patterson Bd. of Ed. v. Dimartino, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Jan. 10, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Civil Conspiracy, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Del Sardo, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, PAS-L-000712-24 ATL-L-1584-22 - Wiser Insurance Co. v. My1Agent, Inc., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Jan. 8, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Conversion Tortious Interference, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Johnson, J.S.C., Referenced Opinion ID, ATL-L-1584-22 OCN-L-002491-17 - River Pointe v. Pulte Homes, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Jan. 6, 2025, Business Opinion Issue Types, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Wellerson, P.J. Cv, Referenced Opinion ID, OCN-L-002491-17 MID-L-3563-19 - Atlanta Int'l Ins. Co. v. Johnson and Johnson, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Dec. 18, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Insurance, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Wolinetz, J.S.C., Referenced Opinion ID, MID-L-3563-19 MRS-L-753-20 - Ho v. Morris Anesthesia Group, P.A., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Nov. 22, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Shareholder Issues Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Breach of Fiduciary Duty, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, De Angelis, P.J. Ch., Referenced Opinion ID, MRS-L-753-20 OCN-L-002491-17 - River Pointe v. Pulte Homes, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Nov. 21, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Piercing the Corporate Veil, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Wellerson, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, OCN-L-002491-17 MRS-L-1909-17 - Fairfield Motors, Inc. v. Dipiano, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Oct. 25, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Experts, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, De Angelis, P.J. Ch., Referenced Opinion ID, MRS-L-1909-17 MON-L-1620-24 - Reuther v. TKF Prop. Mgt., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Oct. 25, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Breach of Contract Civil Conspiracy Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Fraud Negligent Misrepresentation Tortious Interference, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Cagan, J.S.C., Referenced Opinion ID, MON-L-1620-24 CAM-L-2500-21 - D’elia v. Martinez, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Sept. 27, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Arbitration, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Polansky, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, CAM-L-2500-21 PAS-L-2685-21 - Dry Clean Express II, LLC v. River Boulder, LLC, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Sept. 25, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Breach of Contract, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Del Sardo, P.J. Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, PAS-L-2685-21 L-001136/11 - Sae Power v. Avaya, Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Sept. 19, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Trade Secrets Experts, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Referenced Opinion ID, L-001136/11 GLO-L-1212-15 - CURE v. Summit Pharmacy, Inc., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Aug. 26, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Insurance, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Swift, J.S.C., Referenced Opinion ID, GLO-L-1212-15 CAM-L-878-24 - GeBBS Healthcare Sols., Inc. v. American Healthcare Systems Corp., Business Opinion Category, Complex Business Litigation Program, Decided Date,   Aug. 2, 2024, Business Opinion Issue Types, Discovery Issues/Motions Breach of Contract Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing Promissory Estoppel, Publication Status, Unpublished, Judge, Polansky, P.J.Cv., Referenced Opinion ID, CAM-L-878-24 Pagination 1 Go to page 2 2 Go to page 3 3 Go to last page 8 Last page Go to next page > Next page Showing 1 to 20 of 157 items