Online plea agreements up and running in municipal court

Municipal court practitioners and their clients can now resolve certain matters online through plea agreements reached utilizing the court's new Municipal Court Online Resolution System (MCORS). The system is designed to allow municipal court attorneys and defendants to dispute minor offenses, such as speeding, improper passing or careless driving, and engage with municipal prosecutors to reach a plea agreement without the need for a court appearance. It is accessible to attorneys through the attorney login page on the court's website.

The New Jersey State Bar Association (NJSBA) has been monitoring the launch of the system and offered initial feedback about the importance of including adequate information to defendants utilizing the system on their own to ensure they are aware of their right to seek counsel, if they wish to do so. Members of the NJSBA's Municipal Court Practice Section were provided with a demonstration of the program at a recent section meeting, and court representatives participated in an educational program sponsored by the section to highlight the system and answer questions. The NJSBA will continue to track the system and provide opportunities for additional member feedback.

Supreme Court rule amendments lift restrictions on law firm names

Last week, the state Supreme Court announced significant amendments to the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rules of Court that remove the requirement to name a lawyer and that the law firm describe its practice, and to permit law firm trade names. The amendments to RPC 7.5 and R. 1:21-1A, -1B and -1C now permit such trade names so long as the nature of the firm's legal practice is described in terms that are "accurate, descriptive and informative" and shall not be "misleading, comparative, or suggestive of the ability to retain results."

RPC 7.5 was amended to permit trade names as long as the letterhead or other communication containing the law firm name include at least one licensed New Jersey attorney who is responsible for the firm's New Jersey practice or the local office of the practice. Additionally, R. 1:21-1A, -1B and -C were amended consistent with the changes in RPC 7.5.

In 2011, the NJSBA weighed in by invitation of the Court following a 2007 inquiry by a divorce mediation center seeking to use a trade name. The Association opposed the use of trade names, arguing that the prohibition against them was constitutionally permissible and served a substantial governmental interest by protecting consumers from misleading names.

In 2018, the American Bar Association issued a proposal to collapse RPC 7.5 into RPC 7.1. "Eliminating R. 7.5 and the important protections contained therein could result in a loss of any guidance on permissible firm names in states like ours and lead to potential abuses by unknowing lawyers and potential harm to a misled public," said then-NJSBA President Robert B. Hille.

The rule amendments were announced without a request for input from the bar and became effective immediately upon its announcement on Sept. 9. They follow a federal constitutional challenge filed against New Jersey and several other states with similar law firm name requirements by LawHQ, a Utah-based law firm seeking to expand across the United States. A full copy of the amendments is available at njcourts.gov.

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.