17 New Jersey opinions name it 3 courts 1978–2026 11 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by New Jersey courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Lakegreen2 sentences2021"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Id. at 122 (citing State v. Lake, 408 N.J. 2021"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Id. at 122 (citing State v. Lake, 408 N.J. | 4 | 5 |
State v. Megargelgreen2 sentences2025The interest of justice standard has a very limited application and requires a court to consider whether "the sentence reflect[s] the Legislature's intention" because "the severity of the crime [is] the most single important factor in the sentencing process." State v. Megargel, 143 N.J. 484, 500 (1996). 2022The interest of justice standard requires the court to consider whether "the sentence reflect[s] the Legislature's intention" because "the severity of the crime [is] the most single important factor in the sentencing process." State v. Megargel, 143 N.J. 484, 500 (1996). | 4 | 4 |
Brunetti v. Borough of New Milfordgreen2 sentences2026The interest of justice exception has been found by our courts to be satisfied most typically in "cases involving 'important and novel constitutional questions,' 'informal or ex parte determinations of legal questions by administrative officials,' 'important public rather than private interests which require adjudication or clarification,' . . . and 'a continuing violation of public rights.'" In re Ordinance 2354-12, 223 N.J. at 601 (internal citations omitted) (emphasis added); see also Brunetti, 68 N.J. at 585-88 .1 In cases in which time enlargement has been sought, our courts have addition 2024As defined by our Supreme Court in Brunetti v. Borough of New Milford, 68 N.J. 576, 586 (1975), there are "three general categories of cases that qualify for the interest of justice exception: cases involving (1) important and novel constitutional questions; (2) informal or ex parte determinations of legal questions by administrative officials; and (3) important public rather than private interests which require adjudication or clarification." Borough of Princeton v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Cnty. of Mercer, 169 N.J. 135, 152 (2001). | 2 | 2 |
In Re: Petition for Referendum to Repeal Ordinance 2354-12 of the Tp. of West Orange(073069)green1 sentence2026The interest of justice exception has been found by our courts to be satisfied most typically in "cases involving 'important and novel constitutional questions,' 'informal or ex parte determinations of legal questions by administrative officials,' 'important public rather than private interests which require adjudication or clarification,' . . . and 'a continuing violation of public rights.'" In re Ordinance 2354-12, 223 N.J. at 601 (internal citations omitted) (emphasis added); see also Brunetti, 68 N.J. at 585-88 .1 In cases in which time enlargement has been sought, our courts have addition | 1 | 1 |
Borough of Princeton v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Mercer Cty.green1 sentence2024As defined by our Supreme Court in Brunetti v. Borough of New Milford, 68 N.J. 576, 586 (1975), there are "three general categories of cases that qualify for the interest of justice exception: cases involving (1) important and novel constitutional questions; (2) informal or ex parte determinations of legal questions by administrative officials; and (3) important public rather than private interests which require adjudication or clarification." Borough of Princeton v. Bd. of Chosen Freeholders of Cnty. of Mercer, 169 N.J. 135, 152 (2001). | 1 | 1 |
DOVER-CHESTER ASSOC. v. Randolphgreen1 sentence2022Tax at 333 (finding that alleged financial difficulties alone do not provide an adequate basis to apply the interest of justice exception); Dover-Chester Assocs., 419 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Cyklop Strapping Corp.green1 sentence1989See Johnson v. Cyklop Strapping Corp., 220 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Bradshaw
green
2 sentences2009We explained that “[ajbsent a finding that the factors on balance favor preclusion, the interest of justice standard requires a less severe sanction [than preclusion.]” Id. at 508 , 950 A.2d 889 . 2009We explained that “[ajbsent a finding that the factors on balance favor preclusion, the interest of justice standard requires a less severe sanction [than preclusion.]” Id. at 508 , 950 A.2d 889 . | 3 | 2009–2022 |
State v. Locane
green
2 sentences2022"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration A-1903-20 29 of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Locane, 454 N.J. 2021"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Locane, 454 N.J. | 2 | 2021–2022 |
State v. Jones
green
2 sentences2021"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Id. at 122 (citing State v. Lake, 408 N.J. 2021"The interest of justice analysis does not include consideration of defendant's overall character or contributions to the community." Id. at 122 (citing State v. Lake, 408 N.J. | 2 | 2021–2021 |
State v. Hermann
green
1 sentence1978Therefore, whether the recommendation of the program director and the consent of the prosecutor are tested by an interest of justice standard, as held in Hermann, supra, or whether tested as contended by defendant and the State under a gross abuse of discretion standard, the result herein would be the same. | 1 | 1978–1978 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.