West Penn Allegheny Health System, Inc. v. UPMC, 627 F.3d 85 (3d Cir. 2010). The standards for a motion to dismiss for failure to state a claim under New Jersey's Rule 4:6-2(e) make...
Latest Posts
The Supreme Court Clarifies New Jersey's Automobile Exception to the Requirement of a Search Warrant
State v. Fenimore, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Both the United States and New Jersey Constitutions protect the people against "unreasonable searches and seizures" and prohibit the issuance of search warrants without "probable cause." Both federal and New Jersey law, however, recognize an "automobile exception" to the warrant requirement. But New Jersey's automobile exception is narrower than the federal exception, as the Supreme Court stated in State v. Witt, 223 N.J. 409 (2015). Today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Appellate Division in this case had interpreted Witt too broadly in reversing a Law Division decision to exclude evidence from a warrantless search. The Supreme Court reversed and excluded the evidence....
"Liberal Standards" for Standing "Are Not Equivalent to No Standards At All," the Supreme Court Says
New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As Justice Pierre-Louis observed in her opinion for a unanimous Court in this case today, New Jersey state courts have long "take[n] a more liberal approach to standing than federal law." But in this appeal, the statute sued upon, the Franchise Practices Act, N.J.S.A. 56:10-1 et seq. ("FPA"), stated that only a "franchisee" could sue its franchisor. Because plaintiff here ("NJCAR") was not a franchisee but an association of franchisees, NJCAR lacked standing to bring a FPA case....
M.R. v. New Jersey Department of Corrections, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Plaintiff appealed the denial of his petition for release under the Compassionate Release Act, N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.51 ("CRA"). He argued that he had not been physically examined by a physician, and that the statute required a physical examination. The Appellate Division determined that the statute did not require a physical examination and upheld the denial of compassionate release. Today, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Hoffman, the Supreme Court agreed that no physical examination was required, but reversed the denial of compassionate relief as insupportable....
State v. Kelly, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). Judge Gummer wrote the panel's opinion in this case. The panel reversed defendant's conviction on weapons and criminal restraint charges, based on a set of facts remarkably similar to those in State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 80 (2004)....
Blog Categories
- Administrative agency actions262
- Administrative matters226
- Appellate Division1015
- Attorneys fees92
- Case management74
- Chancery issues93
- Class actions154
- Constitutional law387
- Consumer protection114
- Contract interpretation104
- Criminal law325
- Discovery55
- Effect of decisions by other courts447
- Judges1350
- Jury issues69
- Municipal land use91
- Notable opinion writing272
- Pleadings18
- Practice Pointers203
- Standards of review816
- Statutory interpretation536
- Summary judgment371
- Supreme Court of New Jersey944
- Third Circuit Court of Appeals306
- Uncategorized73
- United States Supreme Court67