BAR REPORT - Capitol Report
Panel to consider dismissing old unresolved municipal court cases
October 22, 2018 at 08:00 AM
4 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.
Three-judge panel to consider dismissal of old unresolved municipal court cases
The Supreme Court scheduled three regional hearings to elicit testimony on why older, minor municipal court complaints pending for more than 15 years should not be dismissed. Administrative Order 01-2018, docketed as PAS-L-3211-18, was issued on the heels of a report prepared by the Supreme Court Committee on Municipal Court Operations, Fines and Fees released on July 17 to address the efficiency of municipal courts.
Among a number of recommendations is the development of a process to dismiss old complaints, taking into account the seriousness of the offense charged, the age of the case, and other relevant factors. The Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) noted hundreds of thousands of cases still open and unresolved that are more than 10 years old involving minor infractions, and specifically do not include indictable offenses, disorderly persons charges, petty disorderly persons charges, and certain motor vehicle charges.
The New Jersey State Bar Association (NJSBA) submitted written comments to be considered by the panel. It delineated between non-moving and moving violations, agreeing that warrants related to non-moving violations (i.e., parking tickets, ordinance violations and fish/game charges) that are 15 years or older should be dismissed. However, warrants related to moving violations “raise additional issues that weigh against automatic dismissal,” said NJSBA President John E. Keefe Jr.
The association urged the panel to consider a further distinction among moving violations between those that are minor – such as equipment failures that do not impose penalty points – and more serious offenses such as improper passing. Minor moving violations that are 15 years or older should probably be dismissed, said Keefe. “Dismissing a more serious older violation would simply reward a defendant's behavior in not following through with required court appearances, resulting in more favorable treatment of those defendants that avoid court as compared to those who follow through with their court appearances,” said Keefe.
Earlier this year, the Supreme Court appointed three assignment judges—Ronald Bookbinder, Ernest Caposela and Yolanda Ciccone—to conduct a series of hearings in northern, central and southern New Jersey. At least 60 days prior to any scheduled hearing, the panel was required to distribute to each municipality a list of cases that fall within the scope of the July 19 order issued by the AOC. The morning session of each hearing will provide an opportunity for members of the public and public interest groups to speak on the issue. The afternoon session will be available for representatives of affected municipalities, including mayors, attorneys for the municipalities and municipal prosecutors.
The hearings will take place as follows:
October 22, 10 a.m.
Essex County Veterans Courthouse
50 West Market Street, Courtroom 1114 – 11th Floor
Newark, New Jersey 07102
October 23, 10 a.m.
Somerset County Courthouse
20 North Bridge Street, Courtroom 301
Somerville, New Jersey 08876
October 24, 10 a.m.
Burlington County Olde Courthouse
120 High Street, Courtroom 1
Mount Holly, New Jersey 08057
For a copy of the order or for more information, go to 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
- 1No Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
- 2Poop-Themed Dog Toy OK as Parody, but Still Tarnished Jack Daniel’s Brand, Court Says
- 3Meet the New President of NY's Association of Trial Court Jurists
- 4Lawyers' Phones Are Ringing: What Should Employers Do If ICE Raids Their Business?
- 5Freshfields Hires Ex-SEC Corporate Finance Director in Silicon Valley
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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