If the ongoing-storm rule ever existed in New Jersey, Judge Douglas Fasciale, P.J.A.D., in an April 9, 2020, thorough and well-reasoned discussion of the issue, made it clear that this is not the law. Pareja v. Princeton International Properties, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2020).

The ongoing-storm rule, recognized by many out-of-state cases, relieves commercial landowners of any obligation to remove snow or ice from their premises until after the precipitation has stopped falling.

This content has been archived.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

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]