Judicial Pay Raise Bill Gets Another Bump
New Jersey lawmakers took another step toward awarding the state's justices, judges, cabinet officers and county prosecutors a raise.
March 22, 2018 at 06:26 PM
3 minute read
New Jersey lawmakers took another step toward awarding the state's justices, judges, cabinet officers and county prosecutors a raise.
The Assembly Appropriations Committee on March 22 voted 6-3 to approve A-3685, sponsored by Speaker Craig Coughlin, D-Middlesex. The three Republicans on the committee—Kevin Rooney of Passaic County, Harold Wirths of Sussex County and Samuel Thompson of Ocean County—voted against the bill.
Earlier this month the Senate Budget and Appropriations Committee voted 9-3 to recommend passage of the bill's sibling, S-1229.
The legislation would give members of the judiciary $8,000 raises over the next three years, and then provide for raises based on changes in the Consumer Price Index.
The legislation is moving largely without discussion and has powerful backing: S-1229 is sponsored by Senate President Stephen Sweeney, D-Gloucester; Budget and Appropriations Committee Chairman Paul Sarlo, D-Bergen; and Senate Judiciary Chairman Nicholas Scutari, D-Union.
In a recent statement, Sweeney said raising pay is “the right thing to do to attract the best and the brightest to key, public service positions” because those salaries have been “losing ground against the private sector, their counterparts in the federal judiciary and neighboring states.”
Democratic Gov. Phil Murphy's office has thus far declined to comment on the measure.
In a letter to lawmakers earlier this year, Chief Justice Stuart Rabner wrote: “We fully understand the economic realities our state faces. At the same time, the fact remains that New Jersey judges have not received any pay increase at all for all of nine years.”
Rabner, in his letter, called the proposal “a responsible and fair way to both address the serious issues we face today and to set a sensible course for the future.” Judiciary salaries have not changed since 2009. And because of 2011 statutory changes in the amount judges have to pay into their pension and health benefits systems, judges are taking home less pay than they were years ago, Rabner also noted.
The Legislature last considered a pay raise for judges in 2016, but it was never put to a full vote in either the Assembly or Senate.
Currently, the chief justice of the Supreme Court is paid $192,795 a year. Associate justices are paid $185,482; Appellate Division judges, $175,534; assignment judges, $171,73; and trial judges and Tax Court judges, $165,000.
Also under the bill, the state's 21 county prosecutors would receive the same pay as trial judges, and cabinet officers would see a salary increase from $141,000 to $175,000 a year.
David Gialanella contributed to this report.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllAppellate Div. Follows Fed Reasoning on Recusal for Legislator-Turned-Judge
4 minute readChiesa Shahinian Bolsters Corporate Practice With 5 From Newark Boutique
5 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Brach Eichler; Cooper Levenson; Marshall Dennehey; Archer; Sills Cummis
7 minute read'A Mockery' of Deposition Rules: Walgreens Wins Sanctions Dispute Over Corporate Witness Allegedly Unfamiliar With Company
Trending Stories
- 1Cars Reach Record Fuel Economy but Largely Fail to Meet Biden's EPA Standard, Agency Says
- 2How Cybercriminals Exploit Law Firms’ Holiday Vulnerabilities
- 3DOJ Asks 5th Circuit to Publish Opinion Upholding Gun Ban for Felon
- 4GEO Group Sued Over 2 Wrongful Deaths
- 5Revenue Up at Homegrown Texas Firms Through Q3, Though Demand Slipped Slightly
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250