Legal Research

If you are already an online subscriber to the New Jersey Law Journal News Alert Service you should be able to click on any of the links provided below, sign in, and access the full text of articles listed.

Subscription required for online access:

ETHICS CHARGES VS. JUDGE SPUR MOTION TO REVERSE $1M MALPRACTICE VERDICT
"An appeals court is being asked to reverse a verdict of nearly $1 million in the legal malpractice case that prompted state ethics regulators to bring a charge of misconduct against Superior Court Judge Steven Perskie. Alan Rosefielde, the former general counsel of an Atlantic City real estate company, argues on appeal that the proceedings were tainted by Perskie's alleged misconduct. The Advisory Committee on Judicial Conduct alleges that Perskie, while presiding in the case, misrepresented the depth of his relationship with a witness and that he later gave false testimony to the Senate Judiciary Committee about his continued monitoring of the proceedings after his recusal. Rosefielde argues in Kaye v. Rosefielde, 1120-07, that 'Perskie's incorrect pre-trial rulings, many of which remain points of contention in this appeal, tainted the proceedings below causing severe prejudice to Rosefielde and, standing alone, are enough to justify a new trial.' "

APPELLATE DIVISION ORDERS RELEASE OF ALCOTEST RAW DATA IN DWI DISCOVERY
"A New Jersey appeals court says that a DWI defense lawyer is entitled in discovery to the raw data stored on the Alcotest, the state's new blood-alcohol-testing device. Appellate Division Judge Edith Payne on Monday reversed an Atlantic County trial judge's order that denied Evan Levow access to the data in State v. Aaron Reardon, A-5683-08. Levow sought downloaded data from all tests performed on the specific Alcotest machines used to test his clients. Payne's order, which granted leave to appeal cited an April 29, 2008, memo to municipal prosecutors from state Division of Criminal Justice Director Gregory Paw that authorized the release of stored Alcotest data in discovery. Defense lawyers began seeking the raw Alcotest data in discovery in light of the state Supreme Court's requirement in State v. Chun, 194 N.J. 54 (2008), that Alcotest raw data be made publicly available, with redaction of names and other personal information."

COURT WEIGHS LIMITS OF TRIAL JUDGE'S QUESTIONING OF DEFENDANT, WITNESSES
The lawyer for a Toms River man convicted of murdering his mother and stepfather told the state Supreme Court on Tuesday that the trial judge's excessive, aggressive questioning of the defendant and his expert witness in front of the jury are grounds for a new trial. At trial in Ocean County, Peter O'Brien testified in his own behalf and presented an expert witness to support his defense: that he was mentally incapacitated and unable to comprehend that his actions were wrong because of drug addiction and psychiatric troubles. Superior Court Judge James Citta interjected on several occasions during cross-examination of O'Brien and the expert, asking each about inconsistencies in their testimony. 'That's perfectly proper if the prosecutor does it. It's wrong and highly prejudicial if the judge does it,' O'Brien's lawyer told the justices".

BAD ECONOMY SPURS SETTLEMENT OF LONG BRANCH TAKINGS CASE
"A case that was expected to measure the coattails of a seminal state Supreme Court eminent-domain ruling settled Tuesday when Long Branch called off the condemnation of 15 beachfront homes it wanted to replace with luxury condominiums. Weighing the dismal economy, the city is discontinuing suits lodged against modest bungalows in the Beachfront North area as part of an oceanfront mixed-use redevelopment project. In return, the city will reimburse the homeowners for $235,000 of their estimated $800,000 in legal fees. In addition, the city-designated developer, Matzel & Mumford, will pay $200,000 of the homeowners' fees and $195,000 of the city's fees. The settlement, in City of Long Branch v. Anzalone, also requires Matzel & Mumford to demolish 17 boarded-up and vacant houses that had become a nuisance, attracting vandalism."

3RD CIRCUIT EXTENDS CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTION TO INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS
"The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled in a case of first impression that the protection of Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act extends beyond employees to independent contractors. In Brown v. J. Kaz Inc. d/b/a Craftmatic of Pittsburgh, plaintiff Kimberly Brown brought actions against Craftmatic under Section 1981, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Pennsylvania Human Relations Act, alleging disparate treatment, hostile work environment and retaliation. The 3rd Circuit panel agreed with the district court that Brown was precluded from bringing actions under Title VII and PHRA but reversed the ruling on Brown's Section 1981 claims, alleging Craftmatic's termination of her contract was racially motivated. The panel in its decision sided with three other federal appeals courts: the 1st, 7th and 11th circuits." 

New Jersey Law Journal®
P.O. Box 20081, 238 Mulberry Street, Newark, N.J. 07101-6081
Customer Service Phone: (973) 642-0075