A conversation recorded in violation of the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act must be suppressed.
July 11, 2013 at 05:11 AM
1 minute read
State v. K.W., A-128 September Term 2011; Supreme Court; per curiam; decided July 11, 2013. On appeal from the Appellate Division. DDS No. 14-1-0615 [22 pp.]
The issue in this appeal is whether a telephone conversation intercepted by law enforcement officials in violation of the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act (Wiretap Act) must be suppressed.
Deal Watch: Skadden, Sidley, Slaughter and S&C Lead Big Paper Deal, While Private Funds Grow Massive
Presented by BigVoodoo
Law firms & in-house legal departments with a presence in the middle east celebrate outstanding achievement within the profession.
The premier educational and networking event for employee benefits brokers and agents.
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
A large and well-established Tampa company is seeking a contracts administrator to support the company's in-house attorney and manage a wide...
We are seeking an attorney to join our commercial finance practice in either our Stamford, Hartford or New Haven offices. Candidates should ...
We are seeking an attorney to join our corporate and transactional practice. Candidates should have a minimum of 8 years of general corporat...
MELICK & PORTER, LLP PROMOTES CONNECTICUT PARTNERS HOLLY ROGERS, STEVEN BANKS, and ALEXANDER AHRENS
