marital communications privilege in New Jersey

7 New Jersey opinions name it 2 courts 1994–2022 2 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.

Followed or applied (10)

Case	Followed	Cited
State v. Szemplered nj · 1994 · cited in 5 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 1997–2022 2 sentences 2022The marital communications privilege, codified in N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-22 and N.J.R.E. 509, “prevents disclosure by a spouse of confidential communications made during marriage except under specified circumstances.” State v. Szemple, 135 N.J. 406, 414 (1994). 2021The marital communications privilege codified at N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-22 and set forth in N.J.R.E. 509 "stems from the strong public policy of encouraging free and uninhibited communication between spouses, and, consequently, of protecting the sanctity and tranquility of the marriage relationship." State v. Terry, 218 N.J. 224, 233 (2014) (quoting State v. Szemple, 135 N.J. 406, 414 (1994)).	2	5
State v. DRgreen nj · 1988 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2014–2022 2 sentences 2022Observing that “[a]dding a crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege would amount to a ‘fundamental change’ with ‘serious and far-reaching consequences,’” we initiated the legislative process envisioned by the Evidence Act and “decline[d] to adopt the change on our own.” Id. at 243 (quoting State v. D.R., 109 N.J. 348, 352, 375 (1988)). 23 On November 9, 2015, the Legislature amended N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-22 to create a crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege. 2014D.R., supra, 109 N.J. at 352, 375-76 , 537 A.2d 667 .	2	2
State v. Yolanda Terry and Teron Savoygreen nj · 2014 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2021–2022 2 sentences 2022Bailey’s conviction of two counts of second-degree official misconduct, the Court considers whether the crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege governed text messages that defendant exchanged with her husband on September 16, 2014 -- after the Court proposed the exception in State v. Terry, 218 N.J. 224 (2014), but before the Legislature enacted it into law via L. 2015, c. 138, § 2. 2022Observing that the then-current N.J.R.E. 509 “immunize[d] conversations between spouses about their ongoing and future joint criminal behavior,” we stated “that the marital communications privilege should be updated to strike an appropriate balance between marital privacy and the public’s interest in attaining justice.” Id. at 240-41 .	2	2
State v. Mautigreen nj · 2012 · cited in 3 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2013–2022 2 sentences 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave	1	3
State v. Mautigreen njsuperctappdiv · 2010 · cited in 2 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2013–2014 2 sentences 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave	1	2
State v. Manngreen nj · 2010 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2022–2022 1 sentence 2022See State v. Patel, 239 N.J. 424 , 435 (2019) (“We review issues of law de novo and owe no deference to the interpretive conclusions of either the Appellate Division or Law Division.”); State v. Mann, 203 N.J. 328 , 337 19 (2010) (“[A] reviewing court owes no deference to the trial court in deciding matters of law.”).4 B.	1	1
Wolfle v. United Statesgreen scotus · 1934 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2014–2014 2 sentences 2014The privilege has traditionally been viewed as “essential to the preservation of the marriage relationship.” Wolfle v. United States, 291 U.S. 7, 14 , 54 S.Ct. 279, 280 , 78 L.Ed. 617, 620 (1934) (citations omitted). 2014The privilege has traditionally been viewed as “essential to the preservation of the marriage relationship.” Wolfle v. United States, 291 U.S. 7, 14 , 54 S.Ct. 279, 280 , 78 L.Ed. 617, 620 (1934) (citations omitted).	1	1
United States v. Kinggreen ca5 · 2008 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 1 sentence 2013The Third Circuit has agreed that “communications between spouses pertaining to ongoing or future criminal activity, are not protected against disclosure by the privilege for confidential marital communications.” United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 257-58 (3d Cir.) (the defendant’s request to his wife to collect money owed him from heroin transactions is not privileged because “such communications are not worthy of protection”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); see United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1146 (5th Cir.2008) (intercepted communications regardi	1	1
United States v. Ammargreen ca3 · 1983 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 1 sentence 2013The Third Circuit has agreed that “communications between spouses pertaining to ongoing or future criminal activity, are not protected against disclosure by the privilege for confidential marital communications.” United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 257-58 (3d Cir.) (the defendant’s request to his wife to collect money owed him from heroin transactions is not privileged because “such communications are not worthy of protection”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); see United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1146 (5th Cir.2008) (intercepted communications regardi	1	1
United States v. Irving Kahn and Minnie Kahngreen ca7 · 1973 · cited in 1 New Jersey opinions naming this issue, 2013–2013 2 sentences 2013The Seventh Circuit held that “[i]f the intercepted conversations had to do with the commission of a crime,” the marital communications privilege “must give way to the public interest in discovering the truth about crime, and in enforcement of criminal law.” Kahn, supra, 471 F.2d at 194 . 2013The Seventh Circuit held that “[i]f the intercepted conversations had to do with the commission of a crime,” the marital communications privilege “must give way to the public interest in discovering the truth about crime, and in enforcement of criminal law.” Kahn, supra, 471 F.2d at 194 .	1	1

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

Case	Negative	Cited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in New Jersey. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (14)

Case	Cited	Years
State v. Sidoti green njsuperctappdiv · 1975 2 sentences 2013The premise of Sidoti’s discussion was that the defendant was “conceding that the conversations [with his wife] thus admitted into evidence did not contain confidential communications,” and Sidoti assumed that the marital communications privilege was “not applicable here, for defendant concedes the taped conversations were not confidential.” Id. at 430-31 , 341 A.2d 670 . 2013The premise of Sidoti’s discussion was that the defendant was “conceding that the conversations [with his wife] thus admitted into evidence did not contain confidential communications,” and Sidoti assumed that the marital communications privilege was “not applicable here, for defendant concedes the taped conversations were not confidential.” Id. at 430-31 , 341 A.2d 670 .	2	1994–2013
State v. Byrd green nj · 2009 1 sentence 2022Observing that “[a]dding a crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege would amount to a ‘fundamental change’ with ‘serious and far-reaching consequences,’” we initiated the legislative process envisioned by the Evidence Act and “decline[d] to adopt the change on our own.” Id. at 243 (quoting State v. D.R., 109 N.J. 348, 352, 375 (1988)). 23 On November 9, 2015, the Legislature amended N.J.S.A. 2A:84A-22 to create a crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege.	1	2022–2022
State v. Terry green njsuperctappdiv · 2013 2 sentences 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave	1	2014–2014
State v. Mazzone green md · 1994 2 sentences 2014The Court therefore “view[ed] the statute as preserving the marital communications privilege and prohibiting the court-authorized eavesdropper from testifying as to the contents of the communication.” Id. at 389-90 , 648 A.2d 978 . 2014The Court therefore “view[ed] the statute as preserving the marital communications privilege and prohibiting the court-authorized eavesdropper from testifying as to the contents of the communication.” Id. at 389-90 , 648 A.2d 978 .	1	2014–2014
State v. Brown neutral njsuperctappdiv · 1971 2 sentences 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave 2014In addition, the marital communications privilege continues to protect confidential communications made during the marriage even if the parties divorce, see id. at 533, 33 A.3d 1216 ; N.J.R.E. 509; the spousal privilege ceases to apply once the marriage ends, State v. Mauti, 416 N.J.Super. 178, 193 , 3 A.3d 624 (App.Div.2010), affd, Mauti, supra, 208 N.J. 519 , 33 A.3d 1216 ; State v. Brown, 113 N.J.Super. 348, 353 , 273 A.2d 783 (App.Div.1971). 2 The State conceded at oral argument before the Appellate Division, see Terry, supra, 430 N.J.Super. at 589 , 66 A.3d 177 and in its motion for leave	1	2014–2014
State v. Smith green njsuperctappdiv · 1997 2 sentences 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993). 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993).	1	2013–2013
State v. Loponio green nj · 1913 2 sentences 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993). 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993).	1	2013–2013
Ostric v. Corporation of St. Mary's College green scotus · 1983 1 sentence 2013The Third Circuit has agreed that “communications between spouses pertaining to ongoing or future criminal activity, are not protected against disclosure by the privilege for confidential marital communications.” United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 257-58 (3d Cir.) (the defendant’s request to his wife to collect money owed him from heroin transactions is not privileged because “such communications are not worthy of protection”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); see United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1146 (5th Cir.2008) (intercepted communications regardi	1	2013–2013
PRC Harris, Inc. v. Boeing Co. green scotus · 1983 2 sentences 2013The Third Circuit has agreed that “communications between spouses pertaining to ongoing or future criminal activity, are not protected against disclosure by the privilege for confidential marital communications.” United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 257-58 (3d Cir.) (the defendant’s request to his wife to collect money owed him from heroin transactions is not privileged because “such communications are not worthy of protection”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); see United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1146 (5th Cir.2008) (intercepted communications regardi 2013The Third Circuit has agreed that “communications between spouses pertaining to ongoing or future criminal activity, are not protected against disclosure by the privilege for confidential marital communications.” United States v. Ammar, 714 F.2d 238, 257-58 (3d Cir.) (the defendant’s request to his wife to collect money owed him from heroin transactions is not privileged because “such communications are not worthy of protection”), cert. denied, 464 U.S. 936 , 104 S.Ct. 344 , 78 L.Ed.2d 311 (1983); see United States v. King, 541 F.3d 1143, 1146 (5th Cir.2008) (intercepted communications regardi	1	2013–2013
State v. Paduani green nj · 1998 1 sentence 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993).	1	2013–2013
State v. List green njsuperctappdiv · 1993 2 sentences 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993). 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993).	1	2013–2013
In Re Venezia green nj · 2007 2 sentences 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993). 2013In re Venezia, 191 N.J. 259, 271 , 922 A.2d 1263 (2007) (newsperson's privilege); State v. Loponio, 85 N.J.L. 357, 360 , 88 A. 1045 (E. & A.1913) (attorney-client privilege); State v. Smith, 307 N.J.Super. 1, 11-14 , 704 A.2d 73 (App.Div.1997) (physician-patient privilege and psychologist-patient privilege), certif. denied, 153 N.J. 216 , 708 A.2d 67 (1998); State v. List, 270 N.J.Super. 169, 174-75 , 636 A.2d 1054 (App.Div.) (cleric-penitent privilege), certif. denied, 134 N.J. 486 , 634 A.2d 532 (1993).	1	2013–2013
Lewis v. Harris green nj · 2006 2 sentences 2010The inclusion of "one partner in a civil union couple" is the result of an amendment passed by the Legislature, effective February 19, 2007, to implement the Court's holding in Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 415 , 908 A. 2d 196 (2006). [6] This concern is equally applicable to civil unions. [7] As of 2006, nineteen states have abandoned the spousal testimonial privilege, relying solely on the marital communications privilege to protect marital privacy. 2010The inclusion of "one partner in a civil union couple" is the result of an amendment passed by the Legislature, effective February 19, 2007, to implement the Court's holding in Lewis v. Harris, 188 N.J. 415 , 908 A. 2d 196 (2006). [6] This concern is equally applicable to civil unions. [7] As of 2006, nineteen states have abandoned the spousal testimonial privilege, relying solely on the marital communications privilege to protect marital privacy.	1	2010–2010
State v. Laudise neutral nj · 1914 2 sentences 1994In State v. Laudisi, 86 N.J.L. 230 , 90 A. 1098 (1914), the Court of Errors and Appeals refused to apply the privilege to an accusation by one spouse against another in the presence of a neighbor. 1994In State v. Laudisi, 86 N.J.L. 230 , 90 A. 1098 (1914), the Court of Errors and Appeals refused to apply the privilege to an accusation by one spouse against another in the presence of a neighbor.	1	1994–1994

Statutes the citing opinions construe

NJ § N.J. Stat. § 2A:84A-22 (3)

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.

Where else courts name it

AZ 10 (1994–2022) CA 8 (1975–2025) MI 8 (1986–2026) AL 7 (1986–2025) NJ 7 (1994–2022) KY 6 (1997–2021) TN 6 (2000–2006) NC 6 (2008–2022) WA 5 (1992–2018) MN 5 (1990–2014) CT 5 (2004–2016) SD 5 (1982–2015) OH 4 (1999–2012) IL 4 (2014–2020) OR 4 (1978–2023) IN 3 (1996–2007) MD 3 (1991–2019) UT 3 (2000–2021) IA 3 (2001–2015) AK 2 (2012–2018)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check