Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 3 No. 163 Decisions Released August 28, 1995 STATE COURT CASES INSURANCE — VERBAL THRESHOLD 23-2-6449 Robert Bennett v. Nancy Hand, App. Div. (5 pp.) A plaintiff involved in an automobile accident who does not satisfy the verbal threshold requirements may nonetheless recover for loss of income, despite the bar of N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8a, at least to the extent that the loss is not compensated by income continuation benefits or otherwise. [Approved for publication August 28, 1995.] TAXATION — ESTATES 35-5-6450 Estate of Baier Lustgarten v. Director, Div. of Taxation, Tax Ct. (16 pp.) Since the transfer of present and future interests of real and tangible personal property to a testamentary trust by a nonresident decedent is in the nature of a specific devise to the decedent’s surviving spouse and stepson, it is not subject to the ratio tax of N.J.S.A. 54:34-3 and although the estate would be subject to the flat inheritance tax, since all transfers are exempt, there is no tax due. [Approved for publication.] TAXATION — LITTER CONTROL TAXES 35-5-6451 Royal Food Distributors, Inc. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, Tax Ct. (15 pp.) Since packaged meats, cheeses, fruits and vegetables, either wrapped in plastic or aluminum, or packaged in plastic containers and distributed in cardboard boxes, are items which come within the plain meaning of ‘food for human…consumption’ and within the statutory classification of ‘litter generating products, produced, distributed or purchased in disposable containers, packages, or wrappings,’ the sales of the products are subject to the litter control tax. [Approved for publication.] Additional Opinion Approved for Publication: 35-5-5739 City of East Orange v. Twp. of Livingston (Decided May 26, 1995.) FEDERAL COURT CASES ATTORNEY/CLIENT — ETHICS 04-7-6452 Peter Noorily, et al. v. Thomas & Betts Corp., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (9 pp.) Magistrate’s decision that plaintiff’s attorney violated Rules of Professional Conduct 4.2 (prohibiting ex parte communications with represented party) is affirmed since it was not clearly erroneous to find that the employees of defendant corporation who were contacted were part of the ‘control group’ managing the relocation of defendant’s electrical division, which was the issue at the heart of the underlying litigation; furthermore, it was an appropriate sanction to preclude the plaintiff from calling those employees approached as witnesses. CIVIL RIGHTS — WRONGFUL ARREST AND INCARCERATION 46-7-6453 Juan Anthony Cruz v. City of Camden, et al., (48 pp.) Plaintiff’s motion to amend complaint to add new causes of action against John Doe defendants, and against newly named defendants, is granted as to the warden of the prison, and two sheriff’s officers who allegedly performed a strip search of the plaintiff, since the claims relate back to the original complaint and were specific enough to have provided notice to these parties that they might be sued; however, the motion is denied as to the other officers since claims against them do not relate back (and hence are time-barred) and were not specific enough to have provided notice to those persons that they might be liable to plaintiff. END

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

Reprints & Licensing
Mentioned in a Law.com story?

License our industry-leading legal content to extend your thought leadership and build your brand.


ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.