On this date in 2003, the Appellate Division decided Seacoast Builders Corp. v. Rutgers, 358 N.J. Super. 524 (App. Div. 2003).  This was a relatively rare case in which the Appellate Division exercised original jurisdiction under Rule 2:10-5 to decide a discovery issue.  It was an even more rare result, since the panel ordered that documents otherwise protected by privilege be disclosed as a sanction for attorney misconduct.

This was a breach of construction contract case involving the alleged failure of Rutgers University to pay plaintiff on a multi-million dollar change

One might not think that February 2, a date in the dead of winter, would have anything to do with access to New Jersey’s beaches.  But on this date in 1984, the Supreme Court decided Matthews v. Bay Head Improvement Ass’n, 95 N.J. 306 (1984).  The Court’s 6-0 opinion, written by Justice Schreiber, discussed the public trust doctrine, which “acknowledges that the ownership, dominion and sovereignty over land flowed by tidal waters, which extend to the mean high water mark, is vested in the State in trust for the people.”  The question in Matthews

Givaudan Fragrances Corp. v. Aetna Cas. & Surety Co., 227 N.J. 322 (2017).  Today’s opinion by Justice LaVecchia, a 6-0 ruling (Justice Albin did not participate) aligned New Jersey with the majority of jurisdictions on an issue of insurance law.  As the first sentence of the opinion states, the issue was “whether this state adheres to the rule that an anti-assignment clause in an insurance policy may not bar the assignment of a post-loss clai