
Joel N. Kreizman
Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Joel N. Kreizman
Date: June 22, 2015

Partner
732-568-8363 jkreizman@sh-law.comUnder the proposed legislation, the marital communication privilege that typically applies to spouses or civil union partners would be unavailable “if the communication relates to an ongoing or future crime or fraud in which the spouses or partners were or are joint participants at the time of the communication.” The state assembly passed the bill at the end of last year.
The marital communications privilege is memorialized in the New Jersey Evidence Act of 1960 and Rule 509 of the Rules of Evidence. Rule 509 provides that [n]o person shall disclose any communication made in confidence between such person and his or her spouse.” The privilege is rooted in the strong public policy of encouraging free and uninhibited communication between spouses, and, consequently, of protecting the sanctity and tranquility of marriage. However, it may be lost if a bystander or some other private third party overhears a conversation between spouses.
In State v. Terry, the New Jersey Supreme Court considered whether intercepted phone conversations and text messages between a husband and wife, pursuant to a court-approved wiretap, are protected communications under the marital communications privilege. The defendants in the case, along with 20 others, were indicted for conspiracy to manufacture, distribute, and possess with intent to distribute cocaine and heroin. The defendants moved to prevent the prosecution from introducing the phone conversations and text messages between them as evidence in their case, arguing that the communications were protected by the marital communications privilege.
The Supreme Court held that a confidential marital communication protected under the marital communications privilege does not lose its privileged status by virtue of a wiretap under the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. However, it also concluded that Rule 509 should be amended to include a crime-fraud exception that is similar to the exceptions that apply in federal and state courts throughout the nation as well as under other evidentiary rules in New Jersey. However, given the significance of the change, it called on New Jersey lawmakers to amend the rule legislatively.
As highlighted by the court, all of the federal appeals courts have adopted a crime-fraud exception to the marital communications privilege. In addition, many states, including New York, have similarly amended their evidentiary rules. In New Jersey, a crime-fraud exception already exists for several other communications-related privileges, including those between an attorney and client and a patient and doctor. It appears that shortly there will also be a crime-fraud exception to the marital communication privilege as well.
For any legal matters, don’t hesitate to consult an attorney.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.

Case law following the 2010 amendments to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 26 offers guidance on how courts are likely to address whether an expert witness’s AI records are subject to discovery. Key Takeaways Rule 26 Expert Discovery After the 2010 Amendments This article addresses the question courts and lawyers have faced in recent cases: […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

“Show how 3M is 0% at fault.” The absurd tale of how a 350-page ChatGPT history for 3M’s expert witness was produced during a deposition is more likely than you think. It’s an inevitable trend, and an unsettled question for federal courts as experts make generative AI part of their workflow. Key Takeaways Expert Witness […]
Author: Chris Seelinger

Screenshots have changed the risks of electronic communications. The screenshot problem is that messages intended for one person or a small group can be copied, forwarded, preserved, and ultimately presented to opposing counsel, regulators, journalists, customers, or a jury. Businesses should recognize that a truly private digital conversation is increasingly unreliable and ensure their policies, […]
Author: Sean M. Pena

Developers, engineering, procurement, and construction (EPC) contractors, and equipment suppliers each play a critical role in completing a BESS project. However, when equipment costs rise, deliveries are delayed, or regulations change, determining who bears the financial consequences can become contentious. Well-drafted project agreements are essential to sound risk allocation. Key Takeaways This article is Part […]
Author: Nicholas Wall

IP infringement occurs when someone uses your intellectual property without your permission or beyond the scope of the permission you granted. Common examples of IP infringement include copying a product’s patented features or using a trademarked logo in a way that is likely to confuse consumers about the source or affiliation of goods or services. […]
Author: Michael Mietlicki

When facing public allegations of wrongdoing, companies should not let the speed of the public conversation dictate the speed of an investigation. An investigation designed to confirm a preferred narrative rather than establish the facts can create serious problems later, particularly if litigation, regulatory scrutiny, or employment claims follow. Key Takeaways When public allegations surface […]
Author: Sean M. Pena
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!