Doe v. Poritz
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1995-07-25 · cited 688×
The case concerned the constitutionality of New Jersey's Registration and Community Notification Laws (part of Megan's Law), which required convicted sex offenders to register with authorities and authorized community notification about their presence. The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the laws are constitutional, provided that a prosecutor's decision to classify an offender for notification and the manner of notification are subject to judicial review before disclosure occurs. The court's core reasoning was that the laws serve a remedial, non-punitive purpose of protecting the public from potential reoffense based on statistical risks, rather than imposing additional punishment on offenders who have completed their sentences, and that any resulting loss of anonymity does not violate constitutional protections when the measures are rationally designed and limited in scope.
criminal lawcivil rightsprocedure
Fielder v. Stonack
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1995-07-06 · cited 101×
In Fielder v. Stonack, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed whether police officers are immune from liability under the Tort Claims Act for negligence during high-speed pursuits that result in collisions injuring third parties. The case arose when a pursuing officer's vehicle collided with a civilian car at an intersection, injuring the passenger, after the officer joined a chase of a speeding motorcyclist. The court held that officers are immune in such situations, extending its prior ruling in Tice v. Cramer, because the Act's legislative intent was to avoid deterring law enforcement pursuits through the threat of civil suits, and the immunity applies regardless of whether the officer's car or the fleeing vehicle caused the collision. The decision reversed the Appellate Division, which had distinguished based on which vehicle was involved in the accident.
torts & liabilitycriminal law
New Jersey Coalition Against War in the Middle East v. J.M.B. Realty Corp.
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1994-12-20 · cited 62×
The case involved plaintiffs seeking to distribute leaflets at New Jersey shopping malls to protest U.S. involvement in the Gulf War, which the mall owners had prohibited. The New Jersey Supreme Court held that regional and community shopping centers must permit leafletting on societal issues, subject to reasonable conditions set by the owners. The core reasoning applied the multi-factor standard from State v. Schmid, finding that the malls' normal all-embracing public uses, broad invitations to the community, and compatibility with expressive activities created a state constitutional obligation under the free speech provisions to allow such access despite private ownership.
free speechproperty
Tice v. Cramer
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1993-07-28 · cited 115×
The case involved a wrongful death suit by the estate of John W. Tice, Jr., against a police officer and the City of Wildwood after a high-speed pursuit of a vehicle that failed to stop at police command ended in a fatal crash with Tice's truck. The plaintiffs alleged negligence by the officer in initiating and continuing the chase and by the city in failing to provide adequate pursuit policies and training. The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed summary judgment for the defendants, holding that N.J.S.A. 59:5-2b(2) grants absolute immunity to police officers and public entities for injuries resulting from pursuit of a person who has failed to heed a police command to stop, even if the officer was negligent, provided there is no willful misconduct. The court reasoned that the Tort Claims Act's language providing immunity for injuries "caused by" an escaping or escaped person reflects a legislative choice to prioritize vigorous law enforcement over potential liability in such pursuits.
torts & liabilitycriminal law
State v. Cannon
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1992-07-14 · cited 37×
In State v. Cannon, the case concerned whether a defendant convicted of second-degree theft by deception could participate in the court-created Intensive Supervision Program (ISP) after receiving a mandatory five-year prison sentence, despite a statute requiring imprisonment for first- and second-degree offenders. The court held that the ISP is invalid as applied to such offenders absent confirming legislation, because it effectively converts a prison term into community release under strict supervision. The core reasoning was that N.J.S.A. 2C:44-1d mandates imprisonment for these crimes and the judiciary cannot override this legislative command through its own sentencing alternatives or rules, even though the ISP has achieved goals like reducing prison overcrowding with low recidivism rates. The judgment was stayed until January 1, 1993, to allow the Legislature an opportunity to enact supportive laws.
criminal lawprocedure
In Re Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics Opinion 621
Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1992-06-30 · cited 17×
The case concerned the ethical restrictions on lawyers serving as part-time legislative aides to New Jersey legislators, specifically reviewing an advisory opinion from the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics regarding attorney Alan Zublatt's proposed role. The court held that such lawyers are subject to limits under the Conflicts of Interest Act and Rules of Professional Conduct, barring representation of private parties before the Legislature or its agencies, in matters tied to their aide duties, or where an appearance of impropriety arises, but rejected broader prohibitions on all state agency interactions. The core reasoning was that the Act seeks to maintain public trust by avoiding actual or perceived conflicts from using public positions for private gain, with restrictions applied case-by-case based on facts, leading to a narrower outcome for Zublatt than the ACPE opinion.
business & regulatoryprocedure