• New Jersey Supreme Court Puts Out a Welcome Mat for Out-Of-State Plaintiffs with Time Barred Claims
  • March 30, 2017 | Authors: Charles J. Falletta; Beth S. Rose
  • Law Firm: Sills Cummis & Gross P.C. - Newark Office
  • On January 24, 2017, the New Jersey Supreme Court reinstated a $25 million verdict in favor of an Alabama plaintiff in the Accutane litigation, a Multi-County Litigation, that has been pending in the Superior Court of New Jersey, Atlantic County, since 2005. See McCarrell v. Hoffman-La Roche, Inc., 2017 N.J. LEXIS 19 (N.J. Jan. 24, 2017). In a unanimous ruling, the Court reversed the Appellate Division’s application of long standing New Jersey precedent and determined that Plaintiff’s lawsuit, time barred under Alabama law, was not time barred under New Jersey’s statute of limitations. The issue before the Court was which state’s statute of limitations applied under New Jersey’s choice-of-law jurisprudence. In reaching a decision that reinstated the verdict and applied New Jersey’s discovery rule, the Court adopted a new test under Restatement (Second) of Conflict of Laws (“Restatement”), § 142, and determined that when New Jersey has a substantial interest in litigation brought in its courts, New Jersey’s statute of limitations should ordinarily apply absent exceptional circumstances.