The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two more cases. In the first matter, State v. Medina, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office, is “Under the circumstances presented, did testimony elicited by the State concerning an anonymous female who spoke to police at the scene violate State v. Bankston, 63 N.J. 263 (1973)?” Reversing defendant’s conviction, a three-judge panel of the Appellate Division, in an unpublished opinion, found a Bankston violation.
The other new appeal is New Jersey Transit Corp. v. Sanchez. The question presented there is “Can plaintiff, a workers’ compensation carrier, obtain reimbursement of medical expenses and wage loss benefits it paid from defendants (more specifically, the tortfeasors who negligently caused injuries to plaintiff’s employee in a work-related motor vehicle accident), if the employee would be barred from recovering non-economic damages from defendants because he did not suffer a permanent injury?” The Appellate Division, in an unpublished opinion by a three-judge panel, ruled that plaintiff could recover. Now the Supreme Court will be heard.