BAR REPORT - Capitol Report
Domestic Violence Hearing Officer Program standards revised
September 10, 2018 at 08:00 AM
3 minute read
This is a status report provided by the New Jersey State Bar Association on recently passed and pending legislation, regulations, gubernatorial nominations and/or appointments of interest to lawyers, as well as the involvement of the NJSBA as amicus in appellate court matters. To learn more, visit njsba.com.
Domestic Violence Hearing Officer Program standards revised under Directive #14-18
The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) issued a new Directive #14-18, which supersedes Directive #25-17 regarding the standards for the Domestic Violence Hearing Officer Program. The directive contains a new section “H” to Standard #5 to allow domestic violence hearing officers, at the discretion of the presiding judge, to recommend a continuance order at the final hearing when only one party appears on the final hearing date and there are no amendments to the temporary restraining order. The directive is effective immediately and is available in full at https://www.njcourts.gov/notices/2018/.
AOC issues updated list of rescinded and revised directives
In its ongoing review of administrative directives involving the Civil Division, the AOC issued a notice listing directives that have been modified or removed. Those rescinded directives include:
#10-08 – Model Order for Scheduling Hearing for Guardianship of Alleged Incapacitated Person
This directive has been superseded by rule amendments and materials issued by the Supreme Court in a Feb. 6, 2017, notice to the bar. That notice promulgated a revised model order fixing the guardianship hearing date and appointing an attorney for an alleged incapacitated person, and, therefore, the directive is no longer necessary.
#18-68 – Mechanics Liens
This 1968 directive relates to the certificate of commencement of suit, required to be filed within 10 days of the filing of a complaint under the now repealed N.J.S.A. 2A:44-101. The Construction Lien Law, N.J.S.A. 2A:44A-1, et seq., governs this area of the law and does not require such a certificate of commencement of suit, therefore rendering this directive moot.
In addition to rescinding these two directives, the Court issued a superseding Directive #13-18 regarding court appointments in Mount Laurel cases. This directive supersedes Directive #05-90, which promulgates updated procedures with regard to these court appointments.
The new directive makes clear that any court appointments in Mount Laurel matters, including masters, must be approved by the assignment judge. It offers four recommendations for the proper documentation of such court appointments. They set forth that a judge may make any appropriate assignments subject to the approval of the assignment judge; notification to the AOC of any such approved appointment within 10 days to include the name of the case, docket number, name of the person appointed, date of the appointment and the type of appointment involved; notice to the Civil Practice Division of the termination of any such appointment; and a requirement that the Civil Practice Division maintain a database of all current and prior appointments.
The directive is available at https://www.njcourts.gov/notices/2018/.
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
© 2025 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 AllOn the Move and After Hours: Fisher Phillips; Cohn Lifland; Porzio Bromberg; GSBA
7 minute readOn the Move and After Hours: Greenberg Traurig; Helmer Conley; Greenbaum Rowe; Trenk Isabel; Federal Bar of NJ
7 minute readTrending Stories
- 1In 2-1 Ruling, Court Clears Way for Decade-Old Wrongful Imprisonment Suit
- 2Trump Sentencing, TikTok Ban Welcome Justices Back to Work
- 3U.S. Eleventh Circuit Remands Helms-Burton Trafficking Case Involving Confiscated Cuban Port
- 4Can Passive Technology Change the Impaired Driving Trajectory?
- 5Bradley Arant, Moore & Van Allen Join Partner Promotions Parade
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