The Supreme Court announced this afternoon that it has granted review in three more cases. Each involves a grant of certification. In Gramiccioni v. Department of Law & Public Safety, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office, is “Under the circumstances presented, was the Attorney General required to defend and indemnify the Monmouth County Prosecutor’s Office, the Monmouth County Prosecutor, and Assistant Prosecutors named as defendants in a civil complaint, pursuant to Wright v. State, 169 N.J. 422 (2001)?” In an unpublished opinion of a...

Sashihara v. Nobel Learning Communities, Inc., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). In this case, M.M. (“Jane”), a child with Down’s Syndrome, was enrolled by her parents at a school operated by defendant. Jane began school there at seven months of age, in an “infant” program. When Jane reached age three, she entered an “Intermediate” level program that did not provide diapering services. Defendant told Jane’s parents that Jane needed to be toilet-trained within a few months in order to remain enrolled. But Jane’s doctor said that, due...

The Supreme Court usually adds new appeals in relatively small groups. But its latest tranche of grants of review consists of eight new cases, implicating numerous different area of the law. Arafa v. Health Express Corporation is one of two arbitration cases that the Court will take up. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office, is “If the plaintiffs are exempt from the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA), 9 U.S.C. §§ 1-16, are the parties’ arbitration agreements unenforceable, or can the New Jersey Arbitration Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:23B-1 to -32, apply in place...