Does NJ have discovery privileges similar to CA's "privacy privilege" (see www.pasternaklaw.com/documents/AndYourCase-InDiscovery.pdf at 11-12)?
Is there similar case law in NJ to the Hunter Tylo case law analysis (on p. 11-12 of article at above link) regarding privacy rights and “narrow construing” of concept of waiver for only “directly relevant” info?
See p. 12 of article (at above link) where CA’s App. Div. ruled:
“Petitioner has tendered psychological condition in this litigation only as it relates to termination of the employment contract. Therefore discovery is limited to those injuries resulting from termination of the contract...parties must demonstrate there is a nexus between damages from termination and those which arise out of the marital relationship. Parties have failed to do either.”
Is this similar to the NJ Supreme Court’s Holding in Kinsella v Kinsella:
“In NJ, courts rely on the Kozlov three-part test to limit the waiver in scope to that which is necessary to serve the public interest according to the facts of the case... John's factual allegations have not created a need for the evidence at issue; the evidence sought is not relevant or material to any legal issue before the court; and less intrusive means are available for obtaining evidence to defend the extreme cruelty claim.”
This question is too complex for this forum. I suggest you speak to an attorney.
If you found this Answer helpful, please mark it as "Best Answer". Your feedback is greatly appreciated. Peter J. Lamont, Esq. Law Offices of Peter J. Lamont 623 Lafayette Avenue, Suite 2, Hawthorne, NJ 07506 Phone: (973) 949-3770 Fax: (866) 603-0471 Toll Free: (855) NJLAW01 (855) 655-2901 www.peterlamontesq.com Additional Offices in New York, Monument, CO, San Juan, PR and affiliates throughout the country. PLEASE NOTE: The above statements are provided for informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice. Transmission of the information is not intended to create, and the receipt does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship between sender and receiver. You should not act or rely on any information contained on this site without first seeking the advice of an attorney.
I agree with my colleague, that you need to contact counsel, this isn't appropriate for this forum. Your other alternative is to call a law school and ask to speak professor of conflicts of law.
Leonard R. Boyer, Esq. 201-.675-.5577. If you found this Answer helpful, please mark it as "Best Answer" Please be advised that the answer above is only general in nature cannot be construed as legal advice, given that not enough facts are known. It is your responsibility to retain a lawyer to analyze the facts specific to your particular situation in order to give you specific advice. Specific answers will require cognizance of all pertinent facts about your case. Any answers offered on Avvo are of a general nature only, and are not meant to create an attorney-client relationship.