ATRA :: New Jersey

NEW JERSEY REFORMS

Appeal Bond Reform: SB 2738 (2003). Limits the amount a signatory to the Master Settlement Agreement can be required to pay to secure the right to appeal to $50 million.

Collateral Source Rule Reform: SB 2703, SB 2708 (1987): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15-92. Provides for awards to be offset by collateral source payments other than workers’ compensation and life insurance benefits.

Frivolous Lawsuit Sanction: AB 1366 (1988). Allows a court to assess costs and attorneys’ fees upon a finding that a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim or defense of a nonprevailing party was frivolous.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 1494 (1995). Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 60% at fault. (The law formerly extended the 60% threshold for noneconomic damages only.) The reform does not apply to toxic torts.

Joint and Several Liability Reform: SB 2703, SB 2708 (1987): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15-5.3. Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of all damages from defendants found to be less than 20% at fault. Bars application of the rule of joint and several liability in the recovery of noneconomic damages from defendants found to be between 20% and 60% at fault.

Medical Liability Reform: Contingent Fee Reform: N.J. Ct. R. § 1:21-7. Limits contingent fees in medical liability cases pursuant to a sliding scale provided in the New Jersey Court Rules.

Product Liability Reform: SB 1495 (1995). Excludes product sellers from strict liability in product liability actions.

Product Liability Reform: SB 2805 (1987). Provides that a manufacturer or seller of a product is liable only if the plaintiff proves by a preponderance of the evidence that the product was not suitable or safe because it: (1) deviated from the design specifications or performance standards; (2) failed to contain adequate warnings; or (3) was designed in a defective manner. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable if at the time the product left the manufacturer’s control there was not available a practical and feasible alternative design that would have prevented the harm. Provides that a product’s design is not defective if the harm results from an inherent characteristic of the product that is known to the ordinary person who uses or consumes it. Provides that a manufacturer or seller is not liable for a design defect if the harm results from an unavoidably unsafe aspect of a product and the product was accompanied by an adequate warning. Provides that the state of the art provision does not apply if the court makes all of the following determinations: (1) that the product is egregiously unsafe; (2) that the user could not be expected to have knowledge of the product’s risk; and (3) that the product has little or no usefulness. Provides that a manufacturer or seller in a warning‑defect case is not liable if an adequate warning is given. (An adequate warning is one that a reasonably prudent person in the similar circumstances would have provided.) Establishes a rebuttable presumption that a government (FDA) warning is adequate.

Punitive Damages Reform: Damages Limits: SB 1496 (1995): N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15‑5.14. Limits the award of punitive damages to the greater of five times the award of compensatory damages or $350,000. The reform does not apply to cases involving bias crimes, discrimination, AIDS testing disclosure, sexual abuse, and injuries caused by drunk drivers.

Punitive Damages Reform: Actual Malice: SB 2805 (1987). Requires a plaintiff to show that a defendant acted with “actual malice” or “wanton and willful disregard” for the rights of others. Requires the determination of awards for punitive damages to be made in a separate proceeding. Provides for an FDA government standards defense to punitive damages. The reform does not apply to cases involving environmental torts.

Punitive Damages Reform: Clear and Convincing Evidence: N.J. Stat. Ann. § 2A:15-5.12. Requires a plaintiff to prove punitive damages by “clear and convincing evidence.”