NJ Supreme Court's Entire Controversy Doctrine Ruling: What Attorneys Need to Know
While the breadth of the ECD is sometimes overstated by nervous lawyers, it still can have drastic consequences, so keep the Supreme Court's holding in 'Bank Leumi' in mind, but be guided by your particular situation.
August 13, 2020 at 12:00 PM
11 minute read
The New Jersey Supreme Court in Bank Leumi USA v. Kloss, Docket No. 083372, 2020 WL 4091413 (N.J. Sup. Ct. July 21, 2020), recently provided clear guidance to defendants who seek to file a pre-answer motion to dismiss, but have claims of their own and do not want to run afoul of New Jersey's Entire Controversy Doctrine (ECD) and lose the right to later assert those claims. The court held that the ECD does not bar a party who files a successful pre-answer motion to dismiss from later asserting claims that arise from the same transactional facts. The clarity provided by the court's decision should better enable practitioners to recommend the most efficient and effective means by which their clients may assert any claims they may have against a plaintiff who sues them first.
The Sometimes Frightening and Nerve-Racking ECD
The ECD (N.J. Ct. R. 4:30A) requires litigants to assert all affirmative claims relating to the controversy between them and to join all parties with a material interest in the controversy. Otherwise, forever hold their peace. The ECD understandably scares many lawyers. After all, its consequences are very harsh and there has been a great deal of litigation (and sometimes confusion) over how it applies to various types of claims, from environmental actions to legal malpractice claims. Some may therefore tend to assume it will apply and follow the safest course of action to make sure they do not run afoul of it later down the road—even if there are good arguments as to why it would not seem to apply. Again, this tendency is understandable. But it is important keep current and to understand when the ECD clearly will not apply so that we can be aware of all of our clients' options and recommend the most efficient and effective course of action to take.
This content has been archived.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 AllNeighboring States Have Either Passed or Proposed Climate Superfund Laws—Is Pennsylvania Next?
7 minute readAn Overview of Proposed Changes to the Federal Rules of Procedure Relating to the Expansion of Remote Trial Testimony
15 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Pro Hac Vice in Georgia: Rule Change for Nonresident Attorneys
- 2The Benefits of E-Filing for Affordable, Effortless and Equal Access to Justice
- 3AI and Social Media Fakes: Are You Protecting Your Brand?
- 4A Primer on Using Third-Party Depositions To Prove Your Case at Trial
- 5‘Catholic Charities v. Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission’: Another Consequence of 'Hobby Lobby'?
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