15 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1989–2026 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Couri v. Gardnergreen2 sentences2026The Supreme Court has explained that when considering "a tort or contract claim asserted against a professional specified in the [AMS]," the "nature of the legal inquiry" is not on "whether the claim is denominated as tort or contract," but rather "if the claim's underlying factual allegations require proof of a deviation from the professional standard of care applicable to that specific profession." Couri v. Gardner, 173 N.J. 328, 340 (2002). 2024Our Supreme Court has observed: [W]hen presented with a tort or contract claim asserted against a professional specified in the statute, rather than focusing on whether the claim is denominated as tort or contract, attorneys and courts should determine if the claim's underlying factual allegations require proof of a deviation from the professional standard of care applicable to that specific profession. [Couri v. Gardner, 173 N.J. 328, 340 (2002).] Although the Couri Court's comments were in the context of a discussion involving the Affidavit of Merit statute, the same rationale applies here. | 8 | 10 |
STATE, DEPT. OF LAW v. Gonzalezgreen2 sentences2014For example, if an attorney fails to communicate a plea offer prior to a plea cut-off date, the client who proceeds to trial and receives a sentence harsher than the offer has suffered an injury, i.e., a result measurably worse than the sentence that would have been imposed in the absence of attorney negligence.7 State v. Powell, 294 N.J. 6 See also State v. Gonzalez, 142 N.J. 618, 629 (1995) ("[T]he doctrine of issue preclusion does not prevent the pleading party in the trial of a tort or contract claim from contesting the admitted facts."); Winstock v. Galasso, 430 N.J. 2004Safety, supra, 142 N.J. at 629, 667 A. 2d 684 .] In addition to the doctrine of judicial estoppel, it is also apparent that collateral estoppel does not apply. | 1 | 2 |
Risko v. Cioccagreen1 sentence2026"If 'proof of a deviation from the professional standard of care for [the] specific profession . . . is required, an [AOM] shall be mandatory for that claim, unless either the statutory, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-28, or common knowledge exceptions apply.'" Risko v. Ciocca, 356 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Hubbard Ex Rel. Hubbard v. Reedgreen1 sentence2025If such proof is required, an affidavit of merit is required for that claim, unless some exception applies. [Ibid. (citing Hubbard v. Reed, 168 N.J. 387, 390 (2001)).] It is undisputable that HAKS and JMT are both engineering and architectural companies. | 1 | 1 |
Marrero v. Feintuchgreen1 sentence2014Super. 391, 396 (App. Div. 2013); Marrero v. Feintuch, 418 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Winstock v. Galassogreen1 sentence2014For example, if an attorney fails to communicate a plea offer prior to a plea cut-off date, the client who proceeds to trial and receives a sentence harsher than the offer has suffered an injury, i.e., a result measurably worse than the sentence that would have been imposed in the absence of attorney negligence.7 State v. Powell, 294 N.J. 6 See also State v. Gonzalez, 142 N.J. 618, 629 (1995) ("[T]he doctrine of issue preclusion does not prevent the pleading party in the trial of a tort or contract claim from contesting the admitted facts."); Winstock v. Galasso, 430 N.J. | 1 | 1 |
Lovett v. Estate of Lovettgreen2 sentences2013See Conklin v. Hannoch Weisman, 145 N.J. 395, 416 , 678 A.2d 1060 (1996) (citing Lovett v. Estate of Lovett, 250 N.J.Super. 79, 87 , 593 A.2d 382 (Ch.Div.1991)). 2013See Conklin v. Hannoch Weisman, 145 N.J. 395, 416 , 678 A.2d 1060 (1996) (citing Lovett v. Estate of Lovett, 250 N.J.Super. 79, 87 , 593 A.2d 382 (Ch.Div.1991)). | 1 | 1 |
Conklin v. Weismangreen2 sentences2013See Conklin v. Hannoch Weisman, 145 N.J. 395, 416 , 678 A.2d 1060 (1996) (citing Lovett v. Estate of Lovett, 250 N.J.Super. 79, 87 , 593 A.2d 382 (Ch.Div.1991)). 2013See Conklin v. Hannoch Weisman, 145 N.J. 395, 416 , 678 A.2d 1060 (1996) (citing Lovett v. Estate of Lovett, 250 N.J.Super. 79, 87 , 593 A.2d 382 (Ch.Div.1991)). | 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 |
|---|---|---|
Kugler v. Banner Pontiac-Buick, Opel, Inc.
green
1 sentence1989Plaintiff also argues that employment discrimination on the basis of age should be viewed as a tort or contract claim cognizable at common law, and that even as a LAD claim, it has a common-law basis; therefore, he has a right to a jury that cannot be abrogated or superseded by the Legislature’s decision to codify such actions. *452 We fully appreciate that article I, paragraph 9 of the Constitution “guaranteed jury trials in order to safeguard the right against attrition, either by the Legislature or the courts, in cases where it existed at the time of the adoption of the Constitution of 1776 | 1 | 1989–1989 |
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.