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

SUMMARY OF RECENT CASES IN WHICH THE
NEW JERSEY STATE BAR ASSOCIATION
HAS PARTICIPATED AS AMICUS CURIAE
Prepared by: Sharon A. Balsamo, Esq. / May 2012
Below is a summary of cases from 2011 and 2012 which the NJSBA has identified as affecting
the practice of law and in which the NJSBA has been granted the right to participate as an
amicus curiae. Docket numbers have been provided for those cases that are still pending, and
actual citations have been provided for those cases for which a decision has been issued.
Schoenefeld v. State of New York, Docket No. 11-4283-cv. This case challenges the
constitutionality of a New York statute requiring non-resident attorneys to maintain an office in
the state. The NJSBA submitted a brief drafted by David B. Rubin arguing that, as New Jersey
has recognized through the evolution of its bona fide office rule, with today’s technological
advancements, New York’s in-state office requirement for non-resident attorneys impermissibly
discriminates against such attorneys. The case is pending in the United States Court of Appeals
for the Second Circuit.
In re: Complaint Filed by the Allamuchy Township Board of Education, Docket No. 9-11
before the Council on Local Mandates. This case was a challenge to the Anti-Bullying Bill of
Rights Act brought before the Council on Local Mandates as an unfunded mandate. The NJSBA
submitted a brief drafted by Candida Griffin, John Keating, Felice T. Londa, Luanne Peterpaul,
and Thomas H. Prol arguing that the Anti-Bullying Bill of Rights Act is exempt from review by
the Council because it implements state constitutional requirements and provides a funding
source for municipalities. The NJSBA further argued that the Act is not an unfunded mandate
because it merely augments existing trainings, streamlines investigatory and disciplinary
procedures and directs school districts to utilize existing resources or non-profit resources that
are widely available. On January 27, 2012, the Council on Local Mandates voided the Act as an
unfunded mandate, but delayed implementation of its decision until a written opinion was
rendered. In the meantime, the Act was amended by the Legislature, and on March 26, 2012,
those amendments were signed into law appropriating $1 million to fund the requirements under
the Act.
v. State of New Jersey, Docket No. 69,401. This case asks the Court to determine if the
Pension and Health Care Benefits Act, P.L. 2011, c. 78, which increases public employees'
contribution rates for their pension and healthcare benefits, operates to diminish judicial salaries
and thereby violate article VI, section 6, paragraph 6 of the New Jersey Constitution. The
NJSBA submitted a brief arguing that the intention of the constitutional drafters, the words of the
New Jersey Constitution and other policy considerations require a determination that the Act, as
applied to certain judges and justices, does violate the Constitution’s prohibition against
diminishing judicial salaries. Certification was granted on November 10, 2011, and oral
argument was heard on March 26, 2012. The Court’s decision is pending.
v. Cahill, Docket No. 68,727. In this case, the Court is asked to determine whether defendant’s
motor vehicle violations were properly dismissed on the basis that he was denied a speedy trial
when there was a sixteen month delay in defendant being prosecuted on a DWI charge. The
NJSBA submitted a brief, drafted by Jeffrey Evan Gold, arguing that the Appellate Division