The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in two more appeals. One case involves unemployment benefits, a subject that the Court visits only occasionally. The other is a criminal appeal.
The unemployment matter is Ardan v. Board of Review. The question presented in that appeal, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Was this individual disqualified from receiving unemployment benefits because she left her employment at Lourdes Medical Center of Burlington County, Inc. without good cause attributable to the work?” In a published opinion, reported at 444 N.J. Super. 576 (App. Div. 2016), the Appellate Division affirmed rulings by the Board of Review that there was no entitlement to unemployment benefits. The case implicates arguments regarding the retroactivity, or not, of an amendment to the relevant statute, N.J.S.A. 43:21-5(a), which is likely why the Court granted review. The Appellate Division declined to apply the amendment retroactively.
In the criminal case, State v. Hummel, the question presented is “Based on defendant’s statement, were the officers justified in removing all of the items in defendant’s purse in her presence, before removing the purse from the interrogation room?” The Appellate Division, ruling per curiam, found (as part of a larger ruling) that the officers’ conduct was improper, and that a piece of evidence found in the purse was to be suppressed.