- IN THE MATTER OF THE CIVIL COMMITMENT OF J.W., SVP-763-16 (SVP-763-16, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0914-22 Appellate Aug. 1, 2024
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. SINCERE DANIELS (22-06-1475, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2388-22 Appellate Aug. 1, 2024
- ALIA JITAN VS. RAED ABDULLAH JITAN (FM-13-0687-14, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2832-22 Appellate Aug. 1, 2024
- Delaware River Joint Toll Bridge Commission v. George Harms Construction Co., Inc. (088194) (Mercer County and Statewide) A-55-22 Supreme Aug. 1, 2024 Oral Argument A-55-22 A-55-22 Audio for A-55-22 Close Summary A-55-22 The plain language of the Compact authorizes the Commission to require the use of a PLA in a publicly bid construction project. The Commission’s ability to do so is not constrained by Ballinger . Close
- J.S. VS. M.S. (FM-19-0270-09, SUSSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3890-21 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- IN RE APPLICATION OF A.J.J. FOR A PERMIT TO CARRY A HANDGUN, ETC. (GP-0182-22, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-0493-22 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ANDY REYES (15-03-0237, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1682-22 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- LISA BOGUSLAWSKI VS. G MOTORS USA LLC (L-2061-21, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2097-22 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- JANE DOE VS. DIOCESE OF ALLENTOWN (L-3191-19, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2324-22 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- DCPP VS. V.S. AND J.R., IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF M.M-C. (FG-20-0034-16, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0360-23 Appellate Aug. 2, 2024
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. ASHLEY GARDENER (18-04-0058, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0806-21 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- KYLE BUSBY VS. SEABROOK BROTHERS & SONS, INC., ET AL. (L-0246-19, CUMBERLAND COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1925-21 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DIKEN MICHELE (14-05-0364 AND 14-05-0357, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2831-21 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- THERESA CUPO VS. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (TEACHERS' PENSION AND ANNUITY FUND) A-2066-22 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. GEORGE J. PIECH (21-09-1019, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2920-22 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- DIXON MILLS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC. VS. RGD HOLDING COMPANY, LLC, ET AL. (L-4277-16, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3505-22 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024
- T.B. VS. I.W. (FV-04-3713-23, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-3899-22 Appellate Aug. 5, 2024 Summary A-3899-22 Defendant appealed from a final restraining order (FRO) entered against him pursuant to the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act (PDVA), N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35, based upon predicate acts of sexual assault, N.J.S.A. 2C:14-2, lewdness, N.J.S.A. 2C:14-4, and harassment, N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4. He contended the trial court failed to make factual or credibility findings, and abused its discretion in entering an FRO after drawing an adverse inference when he chose not to testify. The court concluded the trial court failed to make sufficient findings of fact and conclusions of law, vacated the FRO, reinstated the amended temporary restraining order (TRO), and remanded for a new FRO hearing before a different judge. Additionally, the court concluded, as a matter of law, it is not appropriate for a trial court to draw an adverse inference solely from defendant's invocation of his Fifth Amendment right to not testify in an FRO hearing. Despite the remedial nature of the PDVA, and the statute's language insulating a defendant's testimony from use in a criminal proceeding relating to the same act, a defendant's election to not testify cannot give rise to an adverse inference in an FRO hearing. Close
- Madeline Keyworth v. CareOne at Madison Avenue; Suzanne Bender v. Harmony Village at CareOne Paramus (088410) (Morris County, Bergen County, and Statewide) A-17/18-23 Supreme Aug. 5, 2024 Oral Argument A-17/18-23 A-17/18-23 Audio for A-17/18-23 Close Summary A-17/18-23 The only precondition to applying “the PSA’s privilege is whether the hospital performed its self-critical analysis in procedural compliance with N.J.S.A. 26:2H-12.25(b) and its implementing regulations.” Brugaletta v. Garcia , 234 N.J. 225, 247 (2018). One of those regulations requires that a facility’s patient safety committee operate independently from any other committee within the facility. See N.J.A.C. 8:43E-10.4(c)(4). The facilities in these consolidated appeals did not comply with that procedural requirement, and the disputed documents are therefore not privileged. Close
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JOHN L. CURTIN (18-10-1393, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2581-21 Appellate Aug. 6, 2024
- DIAMOND ELITE MERCHANT SOLUTIONS, LLC VS. PAX TECHNOLOGIES (SC-000227-21, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3906-21 Appellate Aug. 6, 2024