Sometimes our state Supreme Court is known not for an affirmative judicial act but for action it has declined to take. Such is the case with the question whether advocates should be able to cite unpublished judicial opinions in briefs and during oral argument. As part of its recent rules cycle, the Court wisely determined to maintain the current rule allowing such opinions to be cited within the existing requirements of Rule 1:36-3.

The question arose as part of a close vote of the Civil Practice Committee. We are told from the committee's 2022 report to the Supreme Court that "Committee members were closely divided on the topic." This means that, although a majority of the committee voted to maintain the current rule, a large number of members supported barring attorneys from citing unpublished opinions except in the most narrow of circumstances.