The Supreme Court announced late yesterday that it had granted certification to review Maeker v. Ross, 430 N.J. Super. 79 (App. Div. 2013). The decision of the Appellate Division is discussed here. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Does the 2010 amendment to the Statute of Frauds, N.J.S.A. 25:1-5(h), which requires a writing memorializing palimony agreements and independent advice of counsel prior to executing such an agreement, apply to bar enforcement of oral agreements that existed before adoption of the amendment?”
The Supreme Court also granted certification in Townsend v. Pierre, 429 N.J. Super. 522 (App. Div. 2013). The Appellate Division’s decision is discussed here. The Clerk’s Office describes the question presented in Townsend as “Can the conclusion of plaintiff’s expert that overgrown bushes on the corner of the property were the proximate cause of the accident serve to defeat the property owners’ motion for summary judgment where the only witnesses’ deposition testimony was that the bushes did not obstruct the view?”