2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

Monday, July 23, 2007

NJ Laws Newsletter E160 September 1, 2004

In this issue:

1. Revised Wills Needed If...
Recent court cases:
2 Defendant's Testimony Did Not Open the Door to the Admission of a Co-Defendant's Guilty Plea.
3. Road block permitted for crime in area
4. DV order not permitted if no intent to annoy or harass.
5. Police Chief even in Minor Discipline matters entitled to representation by counsel.
6. Civil Plaintiff requires objective test to demonstrate injury
7. Recent articles added to website www.njlaws.com

_______________________________

1. Revised Wills Needed If...

Major milestones can signal that it's time to reassess your Estate Plans needs. They also provide opportunities to review you overall financial picture and make sure everything's in place to help you achieve your objectives. Maybe it's time to increase your coverage. Change a beneficiary
Watch for major life changes like these to know when it's time for a review:
• Marriage, divorce, or widowhood
• Birth or adoption of a child
• A new home purchase
• A new job or promotion
• A claim on inheritance
• A lottery win
• A new business
• Early retirement
• Plans for children's or grandchildren's education

When you experience these or other major life changes give my office a call. We can discuss you Estate Plans and the options available.

Recent court cases:
2 Defendant's Testimony Did Not Open the Door to the Admission of a Co-Defendant's Guilty Plea. State v. Rucki 367 NJ Super. 200 (App. Div. 2004).
It is improper for a prosecutor to introduce evidence of a guilty plea by a codefendant who does not testify at defendant's trial. Defendant did not "open the door" to evidence of his codefendant's guilty plea simply by testifying that neither he nor the co-defendant had committed the robbery charged in the indictment.

3. Road block permitted for crime in area. Illinois v. Lidster __ US __ 02-1060 (Decided January 13, 2004).
Police highway checkpoint set up with the primary purpose not to determine whether a vehicle's occupants were committing a crime but rather to ask them, as members of the public, for help in providing information about a crime did not violate the Fourth Amendment. Source: 175 N.J.L.J. 228

4. DV order not permitted if no intent to annoy or harass. Sperratore v. Sperratore __ NJ Super. __ A-4761-02T3 (App. Div. Decided March 8, 2004). [unreported]
Final domestic violence restraining order against the defendant former husband based on a finding of harassment reversed; the parties were estranged, and the defendant entered the plaintiff former wife's garage "to get his stuff"; according to the plaintiff, the defendant was "very anxious," and he began "throwing things around the garage"; even though the defendant's conduct was "inappropriate under the circumstances," he did not violate N.J.S.A. 2C:33-4(a) or (c); there was no evidence that the defendant's premises was to annoy or harass her, and the defendant's attempt to gain access to his motorcycle was not a sufficient basis to justify the imposition of a domestic violence restraining order. [unreported] Source: New Jersey Lawyer March 22, 2004 p. 23

5. Police Chief even in Minor Discipline matters entitled to representation by counsel. Fraternal Order of Police Lodge #1 v. City of Camden Police Department __ NJ Super. __ L-3528-03 (Law Div., Decided October 22, 2003).
A police officer in a civil-service municipality who faces minor disciplinary charges is entitled to representation by counsel, to cross-examine witnesses and to present witnesses on his or her behalf when there is a material fact in dispute.

6. Civil Plaintiff requires objective test to demonstrate injury Serrano v. Serrano 367 NJ Super. 450 (App. Div. 2004).
In an automobile negligence action, the plaintiff did not satisfy the first prong of Oswin v. Shaw because his injuries, which consisted of soft tissue strain and sprain injuries, were not supported by objective medical tests that established significant or serious injuries. The Appellate Division declined to consider whether a plaintiff is required to show a serious impact under AICRA, but it had doubts that a serious and permanent soft tissue injury could exist only where there is a serious impact. Source: New Jersey Lawyer March 22, 2004 p. 13

7. Recent articles added to website www.njlaws.com
DWI breathalyzer ampoules
http://www.njlaws.com/dwi_breathalyzer_ampoules.htm

Post Conviction Motion To Vacate Guilty Plea to Traffic Ticket or Criminal Guilty Plea
http://www.njlaws.com/post_conviction_motion_to_vacate_guilty_plea.htm

Sidewalk Liability for Fall downs on Sidewalks of Commercial Premises
http://www.njlaws.com/sidewalk_liability_for_fall_downs_on_sidewalks_of_commercial_premises.htm
________________________________________________
Thank you for reading our newsletter! God Bless America USA #1
Kenneth Vercammen, Esq.
2053 Woodbridge Ave.
Edison, NJ 08817
NEW PHONE 732-572-0500
New (Fax) 732-572-0030
website: www.njlaws.com

Editor's Note and Disclaimer: All materials Copyright 2004. You may pass along the information on the NJ Laws Newsletter and website, provided the name and address of the Law Office is included.
Always schedule an office appointment with an experienced attorney when you have a legal matter. The Rules of Court limit an attorney's ability to discuss matters over the phone. If you have legal questions, you should schedule an in- office consultation.

Removals handled by webmaster lonekeep.com. To remove, email back & type in subject remove. Removals are performed by the webmaster once per month.