02.05.2015 Views

Civil Litigation Track Hot Cases of the New Jersey Supreme Court ...

Civil Litigation Track Hot Cases of the New Jersey Supreme Court ...

Civil Litigation Track Hot Cases of the New Jersey Supreme Court ...

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

Certification granted 3/4/10<br />

Argued: 10/26/10<br />

Decided: 3/22/11<br />

A-76-09 Town <strong>of</strong> Kearny v. Discount City <strong>of</strong> Old Bridge, Inc. (65,070)<br />

Where a municipality proposes to condemn only a tenant’s leasehold interest under <strong>the</strong> Local<br />

Redevelopment and Housing Law (LRHL), N.J.S.A. 40A:12A-1 to -73, does <strong>the</strong> tenant have a<br />

right to individual notice <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> proposal?<br />

Certification granted 3/4/10<br />

Argued: 9/28/10<br />

Decided: 3/17/11<br />

A-74-09 County <strong>of</strong> Hudson v. State <strong>of</strong> <strong>New</strong> <strong>Jersey</strong>, Department <strong>of</strong> Corrections (64,676)<br />

Did <strong>the</strong> County’s amended complaint against <strong>the</strong> State seeking reimbursement for providing<br />

prison beds comply with <strong>the</strong> notice provisions <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Contractual Liability Act, N.J.S.A. 59:13-1 to<br />

-10?<br />

Certification granted 3/4/10<br />

Argued: 9/27/10<br />

Decided: 6/7/11<br />

A-73-09 State v. R.T. (65,327)<br />

Where defendant’s trial strategy rested on <strong>the</strong> <strong>the</strong>ory that he did not commit <strong>the</strong> assault but that<br />

<strong>the</strong> police cajoled him into stating that he was intoxicated, was defendant’s right to a fair trial<br />

prejudiced by <strong>the</strong> court charging <strong>the</strong> jury, over his objection, that intoxication could possibly<br />

negate an element <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> crime?<br />

Notice <strong>of</strong> appeal filed 12/29/09<br />

Argued: 1/18/11<br />

Decided: 4/28/11<br />

A-72-09 State v. Damu Alston (65,298)<br />

Did police <strong>of</strong>ficers fail to scrupulously honor an equivocal request for counsel <strong>the</strong>reby requiring<br />

<strong>the</strong> suppression <strong>of</strong> defendant’s subsequent confession?<br />

Leave to appeal granted 2/11/10<br />

Argued: 9/13/10<br />

Decided: 1/19/11<br />

A-22-09 State v. T.M. (64,396)<br />

Is <strong>the</strong> defendant, <strong>the</strong> live-in boyfriend <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> child-victim’s mo<strong>the</strong>r, a “person legally charged<br />

with <strong>the</strong> care and custody” <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> child and <strong>the</strong>refore guilty <strong>of</strong> first-degree endangering in<br />

violation <strong>of</strong> N.J.S.A. 2C:24-4b(3)?<br />

Certification granted 9/11/09<br />

Argued:<br />

Decided:<br />

A-69-08 State v. Cecilia X. Chen (63,177)<br />

Where <strong>the</strong> victim identified <strong>the</strong> defendant in a photographic array, was defendant entitled to a<br />

pretrial hearing challenging <strong>the</strong> identification because <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> victim’s prior individual efforts to<br />

confirm <strong>the</strong> identity <strong>of</strong> her attacker?<br />

Certification granted 1/22/09<br />

Argued: 9/29/09<br />

Decided: 8/24/11<br />

A-14-08 Petition for Review <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Letter Decision <strong>of</strong> <strong>the</strong> Committee on Attorney<br />

Advertising, Docket No. 47 2007 (62,134)

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!