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

Search

  • MAURICE OPARAJI VS. FITZ MALCOLM (DC-008628-24, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1636-24 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • AMERICAN BUILDERS & CONTRACTORS SUPPLY CO., INC. VS. THE GALEANO COMPANY LLC (DC-003545-23, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1957-24 Appellate Jan. 14, 2026
  • J.B.C. VS. M.M. (FV-20-1081-25, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2001-24 Appellate Jan. 14, 2026
  • BRANDON LEE VS. PKM LOGISTICS, LLC, ET AL. (L-8706-24, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3613-24 Appellate Jan. 14, 2026
  • JEAN CLAU S. WRIGHT VS. NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD (NEW JERSEY STATE PAROLE BOARD) A-2328-24 Appellate Jan. 14, 2026 Summary A-2328-24      At issue in this appeal is whether the commencement of an offender's mandatory parole supervision (MPS) term imposed pursuant to the No Early Release Act (NERA), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-7.2, is tolled when an offender is released from incarceration in the Department of Corrections (DOC) but is detained in the custody of Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE).      Upon service of his maximum term of incarceration, Wright was released from the DOC to ICE, where he was detained for over three years.  The New Jersey State Parole Board (Board) tolled the commencement of Wright's five-year MPS term until his release from ICE custody to the community.      NERA requires both that the MPS term commence "immediately upon the defendant's release from incarceration" and that "[d]uring the term of MPS the defendant shall remain in release status in the community."  Because those two requirements could not co-exist in this case, the court looked to legislative intent to resolve the ambiguity in the statute.       To combat parolee recidivism, the Legislature enacted NERA to increase prison time for offenders who commit the most serious offenses.  For NERA offenses, a sentencing court must impose an eighty-five-percent parole ineligibility term and a three- or five-year MPS term, during which the offender is supervised by the Board as if on parole. The Legislature required MPS because NERA offenders likely serve the maximum sentence imposed without reaching their discretionary parole eligibility date.       The goals of parole supervision are to protect the public and assist offenders to reintegrate into society as productive individuals.  Because an offender in ICE custody is neither in the community nor being supervised by the Board, the goals of NERA would be frustrated if MPS were deemed served during that time period.      In affirming the Board's decision, the court distinguished this case from State v. Njango , 247 N.J. 533 (2021), because the fundamental fairness concerns implicated in that case are not present. Close
  • In the Matter of Petition for Rulemaking to Amend N.J.A.C. 10A:71-3.11, N.J.A.C. 10A:71-2.2, and N.J.A.C. 10A:71-3.20 (089529) (Statewide) A-48/49-24 Supreme Jan. 14, 2026 Oral Argument A-48/49-24 A-48/49-24 Audio for A-48/49-24 Close Summary A-48/49-24 There are valid reasons not to disclose records in particular cases to ensure safety and security at correctional institutions and to avoid interfering with an inmate’s rehabilitation, among other concerns. See Thompson , 210 N.J. Super. at 123. But because the plain language of N.J.A.C. 10A:71-2.2 bars disclosure in all cases, it violates settled constitutional principles. Close
  • TIMOTHY COOK VS. BOARD OF REVIEW, ET AL. (DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT) A-3102-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • ALEXANDER CARDILLO VS. BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE CITY OF PATERSON, ETC. (NEW JERSEY COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION) A-3322-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. IVAN RIVERA (18-08-2581 AND 18-08-2582, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3863-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • DCPP VS. S.C., ET AL., IN THE MATTER OF J.C. (FN-02-0097-23, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-3891-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • JILL STEELE VS. AMERICAN HONDA MOTOR CO., INC. (L-0470-23, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1580-24 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • DCPP VS. F.K., ET AL., IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF K.L. (FG-08-0011-25, GLOUCESTER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) (CONSOLIDATED) A-1885-24/A-1886-24 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • DCPP VS. A.E., ET AL., IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF S.W. (FG-20-0015-23, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2073-24 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • C.W. VS. ROSELLE BOARD OF EDUCATION, ET AL. (L-0153-20, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2236-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026 Summary A-2236-23      In 2020, plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant Roselle Board of Education, alleging violations of the New Jersey Child Sex Abuse Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:61B-1, negligence, intentional infliction of emotional distress, negligent infliction of emotional distress, and sought compensatory damages. Plaintiff alleged he was sexually abused on two occasions in 2004 and 2005 by a middle school math teacher.  He did not seek any treatment or counselling through the years or incur any medical expenses.      On leave to appeal, the court affirmed the trial court's order granting defendant summary judgment because plaintiff could not establish he incurred the $3,600 monetary threshold of medical expenses to seek relief under the Tort Claims Act (TCA), N.J.S.A. 59:9-2(d).  C.W. v. Roselle Bd. of Educ. , 474 N.J. Super. 644, 653 (App. Div. 2023).  Although plaintiff was barred from seeking pain and suffering damages, the court advised he was "not foreclosed from other available damages under the statute."  Ibid.        Back before the trial court, plaintiff conceded he was not seeking economic damages but instead non-economic damages for disability, impairment and loss of enjoyment of life.  The trial court again granted defendant summary judgment, finding the claimed damages were part of pain and suffering within the TCA and since plaintiff could not meet the monetary threshold, he could not pursue those damages.      While plaintiff's second appeal was pending, the Legislature amended the TCA in March 2025 to eliminate the verbal and monetary thresholds in sexual abuse cases.  See N.J.S.A. 59:2-1.3(a)(2); N.J.S.A. 59:9-2(d).  The legislation states the threshold amendment "shall take effect immediately."  P.L. 2025, c. 29.  Plaintiff submitted a supplemental merits brief asserting the amended TCA applied to his case under the time-of-decision rule as the matter was pending appeal at the time of its enactment, or alternatively, the amendment should apply retroactively to his claims.      The court determined neither argument was applicable to plaintiff's circumstances.  The time-of-decision rule is only meant to apply when the Legislature intended for retroactive application.  In addition, the parties, trial court and this court had relied on the longstanding statute and fifty years of decisional law regarding the monetary threshold for medical expenses as a requisite for recovering damages against a public entity during the five years of this litigation.      As to retroactivity, there was no express language that the Legislature intended its modification to be retroactive to pending cases and "[s]ettled rules of statutory construction favor prospective rather than retroactive application of new legislation" to avoid unfair outcomes.  Pisack v. B & C Towing, Inc. , 240 N.J. 360, 370 (2020) (quoting James v. N.J. Mfrs. Ins. , 216 N.J. 552, 563 (2014)).  Nor was there any indication that the amendment was curative.      After concluding the amendment was not retroactive and, therefore, not applicable to plaintiff's claims, the court affirmed the summary judgment order, declining to depart from the well-established law that plaintiff's claims of post-traumatic stress disorder and severe depression are considered as pain and suffering damages and fall within the limitations under N.J.S.A. 59:9-2(d).  Since plaintiff could not meet the monetary threshold under the then-existing TCA, summary judgment was warranted. Close
  • STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. HORACE L. PARKER (17-12-0823, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3188-23 Appellate Jan. 15, 2026
  • YVONNE J. TERRELL VS. PENAFRANC A. CHITRA (L-6089-19, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1946-23 Appellate Jan. 16, 2026
  • U.S. BANK TRUST NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, ETC. VS. U03 HOLDINGS LLC, ET AL. (F-003752-21, F-003864-21 AND F-005700-21, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (CONSOLIDATED) A-1578-23/A-1723-23/A-2038-23 Appellate Jan. 16, 2026
  • STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DARYL M. WILLIAMS (22-03-0400 AND 22-06-1009, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2603-23 Appellate Jan. 16, 2026
  • IN THE MATTER OF THE FRIBERG FAMILY 2016 TRUST (P-000410-22, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3023-23 Appellate Jan. 16, 2026
  • JAMES MATHEWSON VS. CHARLES J. MOST, PSY.D. (L-1176-23, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-0043-24 Appellate Jan. 16, 2026