Each year, the Civil Practice Committee recommends changes to the Part I, II, and IV Court rules, which govern civil practice in the Courts of the State of New Jersey. Most of these changes are ultimately approved, along with changes to the rules governing criminal, family, and other types of proceedings, by the Supreme Court in an omnibus rule amendment order which generally becomes effective on September 1.
It is always crucial to be aware of the latest civil practice amendments. Although many of the changes may initially seem completely unimportant, and indeed many are stylistic in nature, there is almost always at least one change that is both important and substantive. Failing to be aware of these changes is a trap for the unwary litigant. In September 2024, for example, the Civil Practice Committee saw it fit to change the rule governing requests for admission (Rule 4:22) to significantly broaden the appropriate scope of such requests to include requests for admissions concerning matters of opinion and the application of law to fact in addition to the admissions as to matters of fact that were allowed under the previous rule. This change invalidated many objections frequently made to requests for admissions and even further increased the utility of this already under-utilized Rule. If you were not aware of this change and have had an opportunity since September to issue requests for admission, you may have missed out on interesting opportunities to obtain valuable admissions or set yourself up to request an award of attorneys’ fees.
A summary of important changes to the Part I, II, and IV Rules effective last fall follows:
- Rule 1:5-2 (Manner of Service) was modified to provide for service upon attorneys by email to the email address listed on eCourts. This had been a widespread practice but is now officially permitted by the rules.
- Rule 1:11-2 (Withdrawal or Substitution of attorneys) was amended to require additional information be provided as part of a motion to withdraw as counsel or a substitution or withdrawal indicating the client will proceed as self-represented. The change also permits the entry of a limited appearance in a landlord-tenant matter for the purpose of reviewing a confidential case file before undertaking representation of a party.
- Rule 2:11-4 was amended to alter the procedure for making an application for attorneys’ fees on appeal where the disposition on appeal results in a remand for further proceedings in a trial court or administrative agency.
- Rule 4:3-1 was amended to alter the handling of actions seeking continuation, modification, or enforcement of child support for a minor child later adjudicated as an incapacitated adult (i.e., whether they should proceed in Probate or Family Part).
- Rule 4:10-2 was amended to alter discovery of the identity of, facts known by, and opinions held by experts who performed medical examinations.
- Rule 4:14-2 was modified to include significant changes to the procedure for depositions of organizations and specifically to require the parties to confer prior to such a deposition to reduce conflicts over the scope of the deposition.
- Rule 4:19, which concerns medical and psychological examinations, was split into two parts. 4:19-1 is substantively the old Rule 4:19, but it clarified that it applies to actions in the Law Division, Civil Part only. A new Rule 4:19-2 was enacted, which requires the party receiving the order for the exam to notify the noticing party within 14 days of intent to use a third-party observer or record the examination.
- Rule 4:22-1 was amended to significantly broaden the scope of requests for admissions, as mentioned above.
- Rule 4:58-4, part of the offer of judgment rule, was modified to remove a paragraph that permitted offers in multi-defendant cases to be made individually to defendants against whom no joint and several judgments were sought.
- Rule 4:86-12 was amended to provide for a clearer standard when a guardian is sought for the purpose of withholding medical care for a patient with a serious irreversible illness or condition, and to provide “quasi-judicial immunity” for an appointed special guardian.
- Rule 6:4-3(f) was modified to provide for ten interrogatories in actions cognizable but not pending in small claims section. Previously, only five interrogatories were permitted.
- Changes to Rule 6:7-2 created a new time limit to enforce orders for discovery and information subpoenas in support of the enforcement of judgments. Motions to enforce these against both parties and non-parties must now be made within six months of the order or notice sought to be enforced. Further changes prevent judges from jailing non-responsive judgment debtors.
- Rule 6:8 was changed to clarify that writs of capias ad respondendum, attachment, and replevin shall not be filed in the Special Civil Part.
A final word of caution: failure to keep abreast of rule changes can lead to unnecessary embarrassment and delay. For example, a few years ago, an important rule change required motions to dismiss a pleading for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(e) to be filed 28 days prior to the return date, as if it were a motion for summary judgment. For more than two years after that change, I was still having awkward conversations with opposing counsel who had inappropriately filed their motion to dismiss on a normal, 16-day motion cycle. You do not want to be that guy.
If you are curious about upcoming rule changes, the Civil Practice Committee typically issues reports and invites commentary on its proposed rule changes throughout the spring. Check your notices to the bar.
