The 2025 NJSBA Summer Conference – A Special One Day Virtual Event

The New Jersey State Bar Association is excited to host the 2025 CLE event of the summer! Come out of the heat, pour yourself some lemonade or iced tea and enjoy the very best of CLE. You’ll earn up to 8.2 credits including in ethics as you explore the hottest topics and the most important information for your practice.

Access the seminars by logging in to our easy-to-navigate conference website. Just like our Annual Meeting and Convention and other major conferences, there’s no need to pre-register for individual seminars. You'll be able to attend the sessions you want throughout the day.

Here is a list of the program so far. Check back for more – additional information coming soon!

Ethics Plenary Session

The Ethics of Keyword Searches – How In Re: In Re Opinion 735 Could Affect Your Practice
On May 22, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a 5-1 holding that a lawyer may, consistent with the rules governing attorney ethics, purchase a Google Adword? or keyword that is a competitor lawyer’s name, in order to display the lawyer’s own law firm website in the search results when a person searches for the competitor lawyer by name.

This confirmed the finding in Opinion 735 issued by the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics (ACPE) that the conduct in and of itself  “does not involve dishonesty, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation, and is not conduct prejudicial to the administration of justice. …”  The holding included a caveat from the court that attorneys employing this strategy must include a clear and conspicuous disclaimer on the landing page of their website when a user clicks on such a paid advertisement.

The ruling was contrary to the efforts of the New Jersey State Bar Association and the Bergen County Bar Association to seek reversal of the ACPE opinion. The concern of the NJSBA was that “potential clients are likely not able to distinguish between internet search results that are paid advertising, including as a result of purchased keywords, and those organic results that appear in direct response to the search terms a user entered.” The NJSBA’s supplemental briefing highlighted the experiences of attorneys and a marketing professional – all of whom demonstrated how the purchase of competitors’ names as key words resulted in confusion for the consumer and presumably deceptive practices in order to redirect web traffic to the purchaser’s website.

How will your practice be affected by this ruling? If you are a solo practitioner or with a small firm, what do you need to know about marketing and technology to protect yourself from deceptive practices? If you utilize marketing or technology contractors, what do you need to know to properly advise them?

Join NJSBA General Counsel Sharon Balsamo, who was one of the attorneys on the brief for the NJSBA, along Michael Donahue, Past President of the New Jersey Association for Justice, as they discuss the majority and dissenting opinions, and what you, need to know in light of this ruling.

Speakers:
Sharon A. Balsamo, Esq.
Assistant Executive Director/General Counsel
New Jersey State Bar Association

Michael G. Donahue, Esq.
Stark & Stark, PC, Hamilton

---

Civil Litigation

The Latest in Anti-SLAPP Litigation – Attorney Fees and Other Updates
On May 29, the New Jersey Appellate Division issued the first published appellate opinion interpreting New Jersey’s Anti-SLAPP law. In Satz vs. Starr, the Division held that New Jersey’s anti-SLAPP law doesn't allow a plaintiff who voluntarily dismisses a suit to escape the defendant's application for counsel fees.

While the holding in Satz is a narrow one, it is important because it sends the clear message that New Jersey courts will not tolerate attempts to chill free expression through litigation. That law aims to protect speakers from lawsuits filed to intimidate or silence them for exercising their First Amendment rights. The anti-SLAPP law covers any tort that is alleged that would stifle speech, such as invasion of privacy, defamation, trade libel, tortious interference or intentional infliction of emotional distress, as long as it is a matter of public concern.

Join Bruce S. Rosen, a lawyer with more than 35 years of experience in high profile First Amendment litigation, as he takes you through the latest in anti-SLAPP litigation. Together with Erin Friedlander, a public relations expert, they will discuss what the holding in this important case means to your clients, developments in the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act since the ruling. The program will also explore ways to ethically and practically deal with negative online reviews without running afoul of the anti-SLAPP statute or ethical prohibitions.

Speakers:
Erin Friedlander
Kessler PR Group, Ocean

Bruce S. Rosen, Esq.
Pashman Stein Walder Hayden, P.C., Holmdel

---

Criminal Law

Competency Hearings and Diversionary Programs in New Jersey Criminal Court  - Other Options Instead of Trial
Even when there is no plea bargaining, trial is not always the only available route for a criminal defendant and is not necessarily the best option to ensure a just conclusion. This program will focus on competency hearings and then look at some other available programs that can divert a defendant from trial and provide them with needed services. 

Competency hearings assist the court in determining a criminal defendant's ability to understand the court proceedings and assist in their own defense. If a defendant is found incompetent, they cannot be tried, convicted, or sentenced while the incapacity persists. However, competency examinations take time. A select group of in-demand doctors can perform the often complex evaluations to determine competency, which might mean a lengthy wait in prison until the defendant can be seen. Join an esteemed Superior Court presiding judge, a health care professional and respected practitioners as they not only address when and how to request a hearing, but provide a review of the evaluation process, important questions for the expert and some tips for optimizing the process so the trial can move along as expeditiously as possible.  

The panel will also talk about other important diversion programs, including how to navigate your clients through the eligibility process, and other information you need to know. 

Don’t miss this unique seminar that will help you better serve your criminal clients. 

Speaker:
Hon. Sohail Mohammed, P.J.Cr., Passaic

Cases Ripped from the Headlines – Summer 2025 Edition
Our popular panel of criminal law experts returns as they explore the most captivating moments from recent high-profile trials. The trials the panel will discuss include:

• The sexual assault case against Sean “Diddy” Combs and juror misbehavior.
• The Karen Read trial - the nightmare investigation, how the media affects cases, and whether the prosecution should have retried the case.
• The Raul Valle case – whether a juvenile should be waived up for murder, murder. versus self-defense angles, and when is it appropriate for a defendant to testify on their own behalf.
• Brian Kohberger – should the prosecutors have taken the death penalty off the table?
• Luigi Mangione – the many issues involved.

The panel will create an informative discussion that connects theory with real-world practice. This exciting seminar brings the true crime genre to continuing legal education!

Moderator/Speaker:
Robert A. Bianchi, Esq., NREMT
The Bianchi Law Group, LLC, Parsippany

---

Landlord Tenant Law
How Proposed Changes to the Court Rules Could Affect Your Practice

---

Employment Law
Redefining Discrimination Standards: Muldrow, Ames, and the Future of Claims Under Title VII and the NJLAD
In recent years, the U.S. Supreme Court issued two major decisions that dramatically altered the legal standards for plaintiffs who bring federal anti-discrimination lawsuits under Title VII and similar statutes, and raise important questions about how these developments impact state law claims under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (NJLAD). These cases may also have far-reaching implications for majority plaintiffs who bring reverse discrimination claims challenging DEI measures particularly in this evolving political and cultural landscape. 

This CLE session will explore Muldrow v. City of St. Louis, 601?U.S.?346 (2024), in which the Court lowered the bar and ruled that a plaintiff challenging an involuntary transfer only needs to establish some harm and not significant or material harm in bringing a Title VII claim, broadening the scope of what constitutes an “adverse employment action.” Further, the session will review the impact of Ames v. Ohio Dept. of Youth Services, in which the Court stated that in a reverse discrimination case, a majority plaintiff does not need to meet a higher standard and show background circumstances when establishing a discrimination claim, thus emphasizing equal application of Title VII to all individuals of both majority and minority groups. Both rulings expand the potential for discrimination claims and employer liability, as well as empower majority plaintiffs to use federal anti-discrimination laws to directly challenge diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives that may appear to provide unlawful preferences to a protected minority group.

Further, this CLE session will explore the ramifications of these decisions in New Jersey. Regarding the pleading standard, New Jersey courts already apply a broad interpretation of “adverse employment action” under the NJLAD. Given the NJLAD’s broad remedial purpose, the Muldrow standard will likely be applied beyond the transfer context to various adverse actions in a variety of employment cases.

With respect to reverse discrimination claims brought by majority plaintiffs, it is unknown what the impact of Ames will be given that New Jersey courts have long recognized that majority plaintiffs “must substantiate that the ‘background circumstances support the suspicion that the defendant is the unusual employer who discriminates against the majority,’” as stated under Erickson v. Marsh & McLennan.

Join us on Aug. 21, for this timely and insightful program as we dive into these two cases and assess what this may mean for attorneys advising employers, employees and organizations navigating a shifting legal and regulatory landscape.

Speakers:
Katie Ann Insinga, Esq.
KS Branigan Law, PC, Montclair

Beth P. Zoller, Esq.
KS Branigan Law, PC,  Montclair

---

Family Law
The Rise of Court-Ordered Therapy and Therapeutic Visitation: What Family Law Practitioners Need to Know
Family therapy and therapeutic visitation have become increasingly common tools in high-conflict custody and parenting disputes. While these interventions can promote healthier communication and help families navigate the challenges of divorce, they also raise complex legal, ethical, and strategic considerations for practitioners.

In this program, experienced family law attorneys will provide practical insights on the evolving landscape of court-ordered therapy. The panel will address the benefits and limitations of these interventions, how to effectively and ethically raise mental health concerns in custody matters, and the difficult distinction between parental alienation and protective parenting. Attendees will leave with a deeper understanding of how to navigate these issues to best advocate for their clients and the children involved.

Speaker:
Ronald G. Lieberman, Esq.
Rigden Lieberman Mignogna, Marlton

Support Calculations in High Income and Atypical Income Cases

---

Transactional Law
Representing Influencers