Law Office Of Paul DePetris
paul@newjerseylemon.com

New Jersey Storage Contract Facts

Read below to learn more about this topic.

Or, to receive a no cost phone consultation about what the Law Office of Paul DePetris might be able to do for you, call Mr. DePetris at 609-714-2020 or send an email to Mr. DePetris at paul@newjerseylemon.com.

The information in this article is only for New Jersey Law Division, Civil Part cases and not for other New Jersey court cases, such as those in New Jersey Special Civil Court, New Jersey Small Claims Court or New Jersey Chancery Court!!! Do not use this article if you have a New Jersey Special Civil Court, New Jersey Small Claims Court or New Jersey Chancery Court case!!! Also, no website is a substitute for competent advice from a New Jersey lawyer!

Warning – this article does not necessarily include each and every New Jersey court rule that may apply to your New Jersey case! The Law Office of Paul DePetris does not guarantee that the statutes, rules, codes, files or forms on this website are the latest versions of the statutes, rules, codes, files or forms, that they lack typographical errors or that they have not been amended, repealed or superseded by other federal or state law. The New Jersey Statutes, United States Statutes, New Jersey Administrative Code and Federal Code in this database are not annotated. Accordingly, this database may include laws that: (1) never became operable due to unmet conditions; (2) expired; (3) were repealed or amended; (4) were declared void by a court of law; (5) or are otherwise invalid. Further, effective dates of the laws are not necessarily included in the database. Accordingly, you should not rely upon the statutes, rules, codes, files or forms on this website contained in this database for any purpose and before taking any legal measures, you instead should read all applicable federal and state source law and case law and consult with an attorney for any changes in the laws. Be certain to cross reference all applicable rules before preparing, filing or serving any papers!!! For example, Special Civil Part Rules often cross reference other rules – rules that apply to Special Civil Part Cases as well as to other types of civil cases not being heard in Special Civil Part.

NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT LAWSUITS AND NEW JERSEY BAILMENT LAWSUITS

WHAT ARENEW JERSEY BAILMENT LAWSUITS AND NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT LAWSUITS?
A New Jersey storage contract often results in a “New Jersey bailment”, which may provide stronger protections that a standard contract to store goods. Whether a New Jersey bailment exists is normally a question of fairness. A New Jersey bailment involves the delivery of personal property by one person to another in trust for a specific purpose and such delivery is accompanied by an express or implied contract that the trust will be faithfully executed and the property returned or properly accounted for once the special purpose is accomplished. New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers to a New Jersey bailment New Jersey storage contract are called the New Jersey bailor and New Jersey bailee. The New Jersey bailor is the New Jersey storage contract party who surrenders the property – New Jersey consumer storage customer or business storage customer storing the goods. The New Jersey bailee is the New Jersey storage contract party who receives the property – the New Jersey storage company or warehouseman.

A New Jersey bailment New Jersey storage contract (New Jersey bailment) is a New Jersey storage company contractual arrangement resulting either from an express or an implied contract. For, the New Jersey bailment New Jersey storage contract (New Jersey bailment) may either be expressly agreed upon, in writing or verbally or it may be implied from the circumstances of the transaction and the New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers’ conduct. A New Jersey storage (New Jersey bailment) contract is governed by the same rules of New Jersey contract law regulating all other contracts.

The following are New Jersey storage agreements that may result in a New Jersey bailment:
• airplane stored in a hanger.
• jewelry checked with a swimming pool attendant.
• trailer stored in warehouse without its tractor.
• automobile stripped while kept by New Jersey bailee in a large cyclone fence enclosure.
• a New Jersey agreement to store or repair a boat.

WHAT MUST A NEW JERSEY STORAGE COMPANY DO IN A NEW JERSEY BAILMENT NEW JERSEY STORAGE AGREEMENT?
Generally speaking the New Jersey storage company has a duty to: (1) must provide a reasonably fit and safe place to store the goods; and (2) exercise reasonable care to keep the goods safe. If, during storage, the property is lost or damaged because of its failure to exercise reasonable care, the New Jersey storage company is liable for the damage. Reasonable care means such care for the safety of the property as a person of ordinary prudence would exercise in the same or similar circumstances. However, unless the New Jersey storage company specifically agrees to the contrary, they are not responsible for damages unavoidable by the exercise of reasonable care.

For example, in one New Jersey storage company case, a New Jersey storage company was held liable for injury to peaches caused by negligent failure to keep them in reasonably cool warehouse.

If the New Jersey storage contract customer proves that the goods stored were damaged or lost while stored by the New Jersey storage company, it is presumed that the New Jersey storage company is responsible for the damage or loss. At that point, the burden of proof shifts to the New Jersey storage company to prove that it exercised reasonable care to protect the goods or that the damage or loss didn’t occur while the goods were in the New Jersey storage company’s possession.

For example, where it was not lawsuitd that goods had been delivered to the New Jersey storage company and had not been returned because they were destroyed by fire in the warehouse, the New Jersey storage company’s negligence is presumed the cause of the damage and the New Jersey storage company had the burden of showing otherwise. Also, where furniture was in good condition when shipped and was delivered by a carrier to a New Jersey storage company and when later returned to the owner, was damaged, the presumption is, in the absence of evidence to the contrary, that it was damaged while in the New Jersey storage company’s possession.

In a New Jersey bailment, the presumption of negligence is imposed on the New Jersey storage company as a matter of policy, to compel persons in a position of special responsibility to disclose evidence within their control and under penalty of a procedural disadvantage if they do not. Otherwise, the New Jersey storage contract customer would face a near impossible burden of proof against the New Jersey storage company.

WHAT IF THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE COMPANY HAS A CLAUSE IN THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT LIMITING ITS RESPONSIBILITY FOR DAMAGE?
Many storage companies attempt to limit their responsibility for paying for any damage that might occur to the goods they store for consumers. A New Jersey storage company contract is promissory in nature and the result of a “bargain,” an “exchange of equivalents.” An enforceable bilateral agreement requires an offer, an acceptance, consideration, and a meeting of the minds upon all the essential terms of the agreement. To have a valid contract, there must be a meeting of the minds, as a New Jersey storage company contract does not come into being unless the New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers agree to the same terms. Thus, an enforceable contract only results from the New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers’ agreeing upon essential terms and expressing the intention to be bound by those terms and where the New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers do not agree to one or more essential terms, the agreement is very likely unenforceable. Indeed, the essential element to the valid consummation of a New Jersey storage company contract is a meeting of the minds of the New Jersey storage company contracting New Jersey storage companies and New Jersey storage company customers. Thus, “’doubt or difference’ is incompatible with agreement.” If a New Jersey storage company’s contract contains ambiguous or doubtful terms, the New Jersey storage company contract is interpreted against the New Jersey storage company as its drafter.

For over forty (40) years, New Jersey Courts have taken the position that limitations on liability contained in consumer contracts are frowned upon. New Jersey Courts are reluctant to enforce a limitation of liability clause against a New Jersey storage company customer as opposed to a more sophisticated businessman. Members of the public who are not business people possessing knowledge of the New Jersey storage company and New Jersey bailment industry are often considered by New Jersey courts to be in an inferior bargaining position compared to storage companies. A New Jersey storage company involved in a New Jersey bailment contract with a New Jersey storage company customer (as opposed to a business) cannot completely exempt itself from liability for losses directly resulting from its negligence. Nevertheless, in the context of New Jersey bailment agreements, in certain circumstances, it is acceptable for a defendant to limit a New Jersey plaintiff or New Jersey defendant’s liability to a certain dollar figure.

The New Jersey storage company may limit its damages by:
• including a term in the warehouse receipt or New Jersey storage agreement;
• limiting the amount of liability in New Jersey storage company case of loss or damage; and
• setting forth a specific liability per article or item, or value per unit of weight, beyond which the warehouseman shall not be liable;
• provided, however, that the New Jersey storage contract customer making a written request to the New Jersey storage company made at the time of signing such New Jersey storage agreement or within a reasonable time after receipt of the warehouse receipt, increase the value recoverable for losses, in which event the New Jersey storage company may increase its rates based on such increased valuation, but no such increase shall be permitted contrary to a lawful limitation of liability contained in the New Jersey storage company’s tariff, if any. Further, no such limitation is effective with respect to the liability for the New Jersey storage company’s conversion of the goods to his own use.

The New Jersey storage company may also include reasonable provisions as to the time and manner of presenting claims and instituting New Jersey storage lawsuits based on the New Jersey bailment may be included in the New Jersey storage company receipt or tariff. Therefore, a New Jersey storage company

Since the amount of liability is to be set according to a ‘per article or item, or value per unit of weight’ basis,” a New Jersey storage company may not simply create a lump sum limit of liability, such as the amount the New Jersey storage contract customer paid to the New Jersey storage company. For, since such a sum would not account for the stored goods’ intrinsic market value or their value per unit of weight, such a limitation clause cannot possibly satisfy the requirements of New Jersey storage contract law.

For example, in one New Jersey storage company case, the Superior Court of New Jersey ruled that a New Jersey storage company was responsible for the New Jersey storage contract customer’s losses despite a New Jersey storage company contract that attempted to limit the New Jersey storage company’s liability. In that New Jersey storage company case, the customer’s personal items were damaged or destroyed by water entering into rented storage unit. The New Jersey storage company claimed it was not responsible for the New Jersey storage contract customer’s damages because of two clauses in its New Jersey storage company contract – one titled “Non-liability of the owner and insurance obligations of occupant” and a second titled “Release of owner's liability,” the language of which were as follows:

10.NON-LIABILITY OF THE OWNER AND INSURANCE OBLIGATIONS OF OCCUPANT. [ ] Occupant, at occupant's expense, shall maintain a policy of fire and extended coverage insurance with burglary, vandalism and malicious mischief endorsement for at least 100% of actual cash value of such stored property. [ ] Occupant expressly agrees that the carrier of such insurance shall not be subrogated to any claim of occupant against owner, owner's agents or employees. [ ] The Owner shall not be liable for personal injury or property damage.... [ ] The Occupant hereby agrees to indemnify and hold the owner harmless from and against any and all claims for damages to property or personal injury, including attorney's fees or costs ....

* * *

11.RELEASE OF OWNER'S LIABILITY. Any and all personal property stored within or on the leased premises by Occupant shall be at Occupant's sole risk and no New Jersey bailment is created hereunder. Owner shall have no liability for loss or damage to any property of Occupant stored in the space, or otherwise, arising from any cause whatsoever .... Owner shall not be liable to Occupant for any loss or damage that may be occasioned by or through Owner's acts, omissions to act, or negligence, or by acts of negligence of Owner's or other Occupants on the premises .... [ ] The Occupant does hereby waive and release any rights of recovery against Owner that it may have hereunder. [ ] Owner's liability shall not exceed the sum of $50.00 and Occupant's sole remedy at law or in equity shall be the right to recover a sum within such limit.

The Superior Court of New Jersey concluded that “these paragraphs, together with the rest of the New Jersey storage company contract, so pervert the ideals of good faith and fair dealing that the New Jersey storage company contract as a whole is rendered unconscionable.” For, the clauses of defendant's boilerplate contract were so one-sided as to be unconscionable under the circumstances.

In another New Jersey storage company case, a New Jersey storage company customer sued a fur storage company (furrier) to recover the value of her furs destroyed in a fire as result of fur storage company (furrier's) alleged negligence in failing to unplug a hot iron and for violation of the New Jersey Consumer Fraud Act. The fur storage company tried to limit its damages to only $1 per piece of clothing. The Superior Court of New Jersey decided that: (1) the limitation of liability clause in the fur storage New Jersey bailment agreement, limiting the liability of the furrier to $1 per garment, was unconscionable and thus, the limitation provision was unenforceable; and (2) the provision in the Uniform Commercial Code limiting a warehouseman's liability by term in the warehouse receipt or New Jersey storage agreement did not permit warehousemen to limit liability for their own negligence. The Superior Court of New Jersey reasoned that the New Jersey storage company’s limitation on the dollar amount of the defendant’s liability ($1 per garment) bore no relation to the value of the goods being stored by the New Jersey storage company and such a limitation on liability, if permitted to stand, would be unconscionable. The Superior Court of New Jersey also concluded that New Jersey storage contract law did not permit New Jersey storage companies to limit their liability in all possible ways, insulated from New Jersey court review but instead, forced New Jersey storage companies to follow the limitations imposed by New Jersey storage contract law and prevented them from limiting their liability for their own negligence. The Superior Court of New Jersey found that in the New Jersey storage company case before it New Jersey storage contract law specifically invalidated any storage company receipt which prevents a finding that the New Jersey storage company had a duty of care to the New Jersey storage contract customer.

IN APPROPRIATE SITUATIONS, NEW JERSEY STORAGE COMPANIES MIGHT BE HELD LIABLE FOR CONVERSION
Conversion occurs where someone wrongfully exercises dominion and control over the property of another in a manner inconsistent with that other's rights. Normally, before proceeding with a New Jersey conversion claim, the New Jersey storage contract customer claiming conversion must make a demand for the return of their property and the New Jersey storage company must refuse to return the property. For instance, in one New Jersey storage company case, a federal court decided that, under New Jersey law, the owner of a terminal in which lost cargo had been stored at the time of loss was a New Jersey storage company (warehouseman) and its failure to account for goods was a New Jersey conversion and thus no limitation of liability for lost cargo was effective. However, in certain New Jersey storage company cases against New Jersey storage companies, it is possible that conversion would not apply. For, a New Jersey plaintiff or New Jersey defendant’s failure of a New Jersey plaintiff or New Jersey defendant to honor its obligations under a New Jersey storage company contract may only be a breach of contract, and not a New Jersey conversion of property of the other party to the New Jersey storage company contract. Therefore, if you believe you have a New Jersey conversion claim against a New Jersey storage company, consult with a New Jersey attorney to discuss the issue before taking any action.

WHAT IS THE NEW JERSEY DUTY OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING IN NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACTS?
In addition to the express terms of a New Jersey storage contract, New Jersey storage contract law provides that every New Jersey storage contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. This means that, even though not specifically stated in the New Jersey storage contract, it is implied or understood that the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and the New Jersey storage contract case defendant to the New Jersey storage contract must act in good faith and deal fairly with the other party in performing or enforcing the terms of the New Jersey storage contract.

HOW DOES A NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE DEFENDANT COMMIT BAD FAITH OR VIOLATE THE NEW JERSEY COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING?
To act in good faith and deal fairly, a New Jersey storage contract case defendant must act in a way that is honest and faithful to the agreed purposes of the New Jersey storage contract and consistent with the reasonable expectations of the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant. A New Jersey storage contract case defendant must not act in bad faith, dishonestly, or with improper motive to destroy or injure the right of the other party to receive the benefits or reasonable expectations of the New Jersey storage contract. There can be no New Jersey breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing unless the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant have a New Jersey storage contract. Additionally, the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing may not override an expressly granted right under the New Jersey storage contract. For example, an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing may not override an express provision in the New Jersey storage contract giving one party the right to terminate the New Jersey storage contract and the party’s motive in terminating the New Jersey storage contract under such circumstances may be irrelevant. A New Jersey storage contract case defendant must still, however, act in good faith in the performance of the New Jersey storage contract until the termination actually takes place. Thus, even though the New Jersey storage contract case defendant complies with the express New Jersey storage contract term entitling him to terminate the New Jersey storage contract, the New Jersey storage contract case defendant may still be in breach of the New Jersey covenant of good faith and fair dealing if he fails to act in good faith and deal fairly until the New Jersey storage contract is actually terminated. There are many forms of conduct that might constitute a violation of good faith and fair dealing, but each case is fact-sensitive. The New Jersey storage contract case defendant, as the dominant party, has an even greater obligation than the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff to act in good faith; the New Jersey storage contract case defendant must not put technical encumbrances or hidden pitfalls in the way of New Jersey storage contract case plaintiffs that would undermine the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiffs’ reasonable expectations.

HOW DOES A NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE PLAINTIFF PROVE A NEW JERSEY BAD FAITH LAWSUIT OR NEW JERSEY VIOLATION OF THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING LAWSUIT?
For a New Jersey court to find that there has been a New Jersey breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must prove that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant, with no legitimate purpose: 1) acted with bad motives or intentions or engaged in deception or evasion in the performance of New Jersey storage contract; and 2) by such conduct, denied the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff of the bargain initially intended by the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant. To prevail on the New Jersey bad faith lawsuit, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must prove each of the following three elements by a preponderance of the evidence: First, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must prove that some type of New Jersey storage contract existed between the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant. There can be no breach of the New Jersey covenant of good faith and fair dealing unless the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant have a New Jersey storage contract. Second, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must prove that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant acted in bad faith with the purpose of depriving the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff of rights or benefits under the New Jersey storage contract. Third, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must prove that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s conduct caused the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff to suffer injury, damage, loss or harm.

WAS THERE A NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT BETWEEN THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE PLAINTIFF AND NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE DEFENDANT?
The New Jersey court must first determine whether some type of New Jersey storage contract existed between the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and the New Jersey storage contract case defendant. A New Jersey storage contract may be expressed or implied or may be a mixture of the two. An express New Jersey storage contract is one in which the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant have shown their agreement by words. Express New Jersey storage contracts include those in which the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant have orally stated the terms to each other or have placed the terms in writing. An implied New Jersey storage contract is one in which the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant show their agreement by conduct. For example, if someone provides services to another under circumstances that do not support the idea that they were donated or free, New Jersey storage contract law implies an obligation to pay the reasonable value of services. Thus, an implied New Jersey storage contract is a New Jersey agreement inferred from the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s conduct or from the circumstances surrounding their relationship. In other words, a New Jersey storage contract case defendant may be obligated to pay for services rendered for New Jersey storage contract case defendant by New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff if the circumstances are such that New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff reasonably expected New Jersey storage contract case defendant to compensate New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and if a reasonable person in New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s position would know that New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff was performing the services expecting that New Jersey storage contract case defendant would pay for them. There are 5 essential elements to a valid New Jersey storage contract:

1. mutuality of assent;
2. legal capacity of the parties;
3. valuable consideration;
4. legality of subject matter; and
5. a writing.

Under the requirement of mutuality of assent, for New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants to enter into a New Jersey storage contract, a meeting of the minds must take place between the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants. The mutuality of assent must be real and not the result of mistake, misrepresentation, New Jersey legal fraud, New Jersey consumer fraud, duress or undue influence. Since, a New Jersey breach of contract is never presumed; rather, the burden of establishing a New Jersey breach of contract rests with the New Jersey plaintiff or New Jersey defendant asserting the New Jersey breach. A New Jersey storage contract is an exchange of promises and thus is the result of a “bargain,” an “exchange of equivalents.” An enforceable bilateral New Jersey agreement requires an offer, an acceptance, consideration and a meeting of the minds upon all the essential terms of the New Jersey agreement. To have a valid New Jersey storage contract, there must be a meeting of the minds, as a New Jersey storage contract does not come into being unless the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants agree to the same terms. Thus, an enforceable contract only results from the New Jersey plaintiffs’ and New Jersey defendants’ agreeing upon essential terms and manifesting an intention to be bound by those terms and where the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants do not agree to one or more essential terms, the New Jersey agreement may be unenforceable. Indeed, it is fundamental that the essential element to the valid consummation of a New Jersey storage contract is a meeting of the minds of the New Jersey storage contracting parties. Thus, doubt or difference between the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants to an alleged contract is normally incompatible with the claim that the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants agreement to terms. If the contemplated agreement is to be bilateral, the offeror and offeree alike must express agreement as to every term of the New Jersey storage contract. The offerror does this in the offer; the offeree must do it in his acceptance. When interpreting a New Jersey storage contract, it is not the real intent that controls but rather the intent expressed or apparent in the writing. Further, normally it is not the New Jersey court’s role to make a new contract or to supply any material stipulations or conditions which contravene the New Jersey agreements of the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants. The mere fact that a New Jersey storage contract is somewhat harsh or unfair in its operation does not excuse the performance of same and the New Jersey court cannot create contractual obligations that are not based on the expressed intention of the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants. Indeed, the New Jersey court will not normally rewrite the New Jersey agreement to provide the protection which a New Jersey plaintiff or New Jersey defendant failed to obtain for themselves. Instead, the judicial function of the New Jersey court is normally to enforce the New Jersey storage contract as it is written. Moreover, where the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants are experienced businesspeople, courts generally should not tinker with a finely drawn and precise contract entered into by experienced business people that regulates their financial affairs. Also, equitable relief is not normally available merely because enforcement of the New Jersey storage contract causes hardship to one of the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants. Thus, if a New Jersey storage contract contains ambiguous or doubtful terms, the New Jersey storage contract is generally construed against its drafter. The interpretation of a New Jersey storage contract is often a legal question for the New Jersey court rather than for a New Jersey jury.

ARE NEW JERSEY ORAL CONTRACTS ENFORCEABLE IN A NEW JERSEY COURT?
An oral contract for goods or services between businesses may be enforceable in a New Jersey Court, especially if there is proof that the terms of the New Jersey storage contract were sufficiently definite and that the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants agreed to be bound to the oral agreement. While there does exist a statute of frauds in New Jersey that requires that certain contracts be in writing, in certain situations, it can be overcome.

DID THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE DEFENDANT ACT IN BAD FAITH WITH THE INTENT TO DEPRIVE THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE PLAINTIFF OF RIGHTS OR BENEFITS UNDER THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT?
If the New Jersey storage contract case defendant finds that a New Jersey storage contract existed between the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant, the New Jersey court must then determine whether the New Jersey storage contract case defendant violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. As to this element, the New Jersey court must decide whether the New Jersey storage contract case defendant acted with bad faith to interfere with the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff’s right to receive the benefits of the New Jersey storage contract. Proof of bad motive or intention is essential to a claim that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant has violated the New Jersey covenant of good faith and fair dealing. In considering what constitutes bad faith, the New Jersey court should consider a number of factors, including the expectations of the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant and the purposes for which the New Jersey storage contract was made. The New Jersey court should also consider the level of sophistication between the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant, whether the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff and New Jersey storage contract case defendant had equal or unequal bargaining power, and whether the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s action involved the exercise of discretion. Keep in mind, however, that bad faith is not established by simply showing that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s motive for his/her actions did not consider the best interests of the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff. New Jersey storage contract law does not require parties to behave thoughtfully, charitably or unselfishly toward each other. In order for the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff to prevail on his/her claim, the New Jersey court must specifically find that bad faith motivated the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s actions. A New Jersey storage contract case defendant who acts in good faith on an honest, but mistaken, belief that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s actions were justified has not breached the New Jersey covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

DID THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE DEFENDANT’S CONDUCT CAUSED THE NEW JERSEY STORAGE CONTRACT CASE PLAINTIFF TO SUFFER INJURY, DAMAGE, LOSS OR HARM?
The New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff must also prove that because of the New Jersey storage contract case defendant’s actions, the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff was unable to realize the benefits of the New Jersey storage contract.

SUMMARY OF PROOFS REQUIRED TO WIN A NEW JERSEY BAD FAITH LAWSUIT OR NEW JERSEY VIOLATION OF THE COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING LAWSUIT
if the New Jersey storage contract case defendant finds that the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff has proven by a preponderance of the evidence: (1) the existence of some type of New Jersey storage contract; (2) that the New Jersey storage contract case defendant, although acting consistent with the New Jersey storage contract’s terms, acted in bad faith with the intent to deprive the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff of his/her reasonable expectations under the New Jersey storage contract; and (3) the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff sustained injury or loss as a result of such action, then the New Jersey court must find for the New Jersey storage contract case plaintiff.

NEED HELP WITH YOUR NEW JERSEY CASE?
Handling your New Jersey case wrong from the beginning may only cost you more money and time in the end!! Do it right the first time by seeking legal advice from a competent New Jersey lawyer!
Let the Law Office of Paul DePetris help you with your New Jersey case. Not all New Jersey cases require you to pay expensive legal fees to get legal help.

WHY SHOULD NEW JERSEY PRO SE PLAINTIFFS AND NEW JERSEY PRO SE DEFENDANTS SEEK HELP FROM A NEW JERSEY LAWYER?
Handling your New Jersey case wrong from the beginning may only cost you more money and time in the end!! Do it right the first time by seeking legal advice from a competent New Jersey lawyer!
Many New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants make the mistake of not consulting a New Jersey lawyer before filing New Jersey Court papers only to later learn that the New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants made serious mistakes that could cause them to lose their New Jersey case. Let the Law Office of Paul DePetris help you with your New Jersey case.

CAN I RELY ON NEW JERSEY COURT PERSONNEL FOR LEGAL ADVICE?
New Jersey Court employees cannot give you “free” legal advice and a New Jersey Court judge may refuse to let you claim that you were right in taking an action (or in deciding not to take action) because you relied on advice from such employees. Most New Jersey Court employees are not trained New Jersey attorneys and therefore, they may not know what advice to give you. Working at the New Jersey Court as a non-judge is not the same as practicing law.

CAN I RELY ON NEW JERSEY COURT FORMS PROVIDED BY THE NEW JERSEY COURT?
The New Jersey Court usually provides certain types of New Jersey Court legal forms to the public and those forms are often very helpful. However, beware relying on New Jersey Court forms provided by the New Jersey Court – the New Jersey Court forms are often deceptively simple, while New Jersey cases often are much more complex than they first appear to be. There is simply no substitute for a competent New Jersey attorney licensed to practice law in New Jersey who has experience handling New Jersey cases. New Jersey Court forms don’t talk and New Jersey Court forms and their directions rarely, if ever, cover every possible situation, set of facts or legal issue that may arise in a New Jersey case. Each New Jersey case has its own particular legal issues and therefore, its own challenges. If you can afford a competent New Jersey attorney, it is best to have the New Jersey attorney prepare your New Jersey Court paperwork for you.

CAN I HANDLE A NEW JERSEY CASE MYSELF?
Many New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants can and do successfully handle New Jersey cases, from filing the first paperwork to the collection of a New Jersey Court judgment. However, many other New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants also make mistakes that lead to the dismissal of their New Jersey cases or that result in the entry of a New Jersey Court money judgment against them. The greater the money at stake, the greater the reason to consider using the services of a competent attorney licensed to practice law in New Jersey to handle part or all of the New Jersey case. The following are reasons to use an attorney to handle part or all of your New Jersey case:
• New Jersey Court fees often change
• New Jersey Court rules often change
• New Jersey Court employees cannot give you “free” legal advice and a New Jersey Court judge may refuse to let you claim that you were right in taking an action (or in deciding not to take action) because you relied on advice from such employees
• New Jersey Court forms available on websites may not cover every situation you may face in Court
• each New Jersey case has its own particular legal issues and therefore, its own challenges
• it is very common for New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants to file inadequate or incorrect New Jersey Court complaints that result in the New Jersey Court complaints or answers to New Jersey Court complaints being rejected by the New Jersey Court or being dismissed by the New Jersey Court after filing and before or after trial because of procedural deficiencies.
• it is not uncommon for judges to get very frustrated by an unrepresented party’s lack of preparation or ignorance of the facts or law of the New Jersey case.
• a Court has the power to punish unprepared New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants, such as by throwing their New Jersey case out of Court or limiting what they can present at the New Jersey Court trial.
• New Jersey has many published cases, laws, regulations, Court rules and rules of evidence that can be very tricky to understand and that can be used to prevent you from doing much of what you want to do at the New Jersey Court trial.
• it is very common for Courts to refuse to allow a party to use or refer to documents or items at the New Jersey Court trial that the person themselves never prepared. Often New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants stumble into New Jersey Court with a video, photograph, bill or affidavit or other form of written statement, thinking they are going to use it as proof that they lost money or that they are not responsible for someone else’s damages, only to have a New Jersey Court judge tell the New Jersey plaintiffs and New Jersey defendants that it is not going to even consider such items or documents.
• without the proper preparation, items and documents may never be considered by the New Jersey Court. Also, if there are any legal issues to be dealt with at the New Jersey Court trial, you must be prepared to argue them, which may require you to refer to Court rules, evidence rules, laws, regulations or published cases.
• you cannot show up at the New Jersey Court expecting the judge hearing your New Jersey case to explain Court rules, evidence rules, Court procedure or the details of the law that applies to your New Jersey case. The judge hearing your New Jersey case is not permitted to give you legal advice.

It is important to remember that even if you have an attorney, you could lose your New Jersey case. Hiring an attorney to handle part or all of your New Jersey case does not guarantee your success. However, it may provide what is needed to win your New Jersey case or to avoid certain mistakes.

DOES THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL DEPETRIS HAVE EXPERIENCE HANDLING NEW JERSEY CASES?
Yes. Paul DePetris has performed the following tasks:
• handled New Jersey cases for plaintiffs and defendants across New Jersey, from Bergen County New Jersey to Cumberland County New Jersey, including representations of individuals, small businesses and large corporations.
• settled New Jersey cases for plaintiffs and defendants across New Jersey.
• reviewed many New Jersey Court settlement agreements.
• enforced many New Jersey Court settlement agreements.
• provided New Jersey pro se plaintiffs and New Jersey pro se defendants with New Jersey Court legal advice and prepared New Jersey Court legal forms
• prepared and filed many New Jersey Court complaints
• tried New Jersey Court jury trials
• mediated many New Jersey cases
• argued New Jersey Court motions
• handled New Jersey Court proof hearings
• handled New Jersey Court post judgment collection proceedings

Mr. DePetris has appeared before the Superior Court of New Jersey in the following counties:
• Atlantic County New Jersey Court
• Bergen County New Jersey Court
• Burlington County New Jersey Court
• Camden County New Jersey Court
• Cape May County New Jersey Court
• Cumberland County New Jersey Court
• Essex County New Jersey Court
• Gloucester County New Jersey Court
• Hudson County New Jersey Court
• Mercer County New Jersey Court
• Middlesex County New Jersey Court
• Monmouth County New Jersey Court
• Morris County New Jersey Court
• Ocean County New Jersey Court
• Passaic County New Jersey Court
• Salem County New Jersey Court
• Somerset County New Jersey Court
• Sussex County New Jersey Court
• Union County New Jersey Court
• Warren County New Jersey Court

IN WHAT NEW JERSEY COUNTIES WILL THE LAW OFFICE OF PAUL DEPETRIS HANDLE NEW JERSEY CASES?
The Law Office of Paul DePetris offers to handle and help individuals and businesses with New Jersey Court Claims cases in North, Central and Southern New Jersey, including cases in the following New Jersey counties:
• Atlantic County New Jersey Court
• Bergen County New Jersey Court
• Burlington County New Jersey Court
• Camden County New Jersey Court
• Cape May County New Jersey Court
• Cumberland County New Jersey Court
• Essex County New Jersey Court
• Gloucester County New Jersey Court
• Hudson County New Jersey Court
• Mercer County New Jersey Court
• Middlesex County New Jersey Court
• Monmouth County New Jersey Court
• Morris County New Jersey Court
• Ocean County New Jersey Court
• Passaic County New Jersey Court
• Salem County New Jersey Court
• Somerset County New Jersey Court
• Sussex County New Jersey Court
• Union County New Jersey Court
• Warren County New Jersey Court

WHAT IF I DON’T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY TO HIRE AN ATTORNEY TO HANDLE MY NEW JERSEY CASE FROM BEGINNING TO END?
In many situations, the Law Office of Paul DePetris offers alternatives to handling New Jersey cases for an hourly fee, such as by offering to handle your New Jersey case up to trial for a fixed fee or to help you handle your New Jersey case by yourself. Such flexible methods may allow you to keep the amount legal fees you spend on your New Jersey case to a fixed sum, while providing you the help you need to handle your New Jersey case. For a no obligation phone consultation about what the Firm might be able to do for you, call Mr. DePetris at 609-714-2020 or send an email to Mr. DePetris.

Website Builder