Donald Scarinci

Managing Partner, Scarinci Hollenbeck,LLC; Member, US Citizens Coinage Advisory Comm.; author & speaker

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The takeaway: paramedics acting on a physician's orders during genuine emergencies are protected, even if their care is later alleged to be negligent.

Read our full analysis here: https://t.co/G7myM90Occ

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The NJ Supreme Court just clarified when paramedics are immune from civil liability. In Almonte v. Township of Union (decided June 25, 2026), a unanimous Court sided with the paramedics. Here is what the ruling means.

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

Writing for the unanimous Court, Justice John Jay Hoffman stressed that paramedics work under substantial time pressure. Requiring constant physician contact would undermine the Legislature's intent to let them act without fear of tort liability.

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The @WSJ quotes me on the proposed Trump $1 coin: "If they make this coin, it is illegal and Congress should act to stop it."

The Citizens Coinage Advisory Committee exists for a reason. Federal law requires design review — and that review hasn't happened.

https://t.co/76Dl8wDMZd

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The takeaway: New Jersey defendants have a real right to probe how facial recognition shaped their prosecution, but the scope is calibrated case by case, not by checklist. A significant marker as this technology spreads through law enforcement.

Read the full analysis: https://t.co/GJGfPQ1lUx

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The NJ Supreme Court just ruled on how much a defendant can learn about police use of facial recognition technology. In State v. Miles, the Court said there's no one-size-fits-all answer. Discovery depends on the facts of each case.

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

What can wait: proprietary information like the FRT source code. The Court held the trial judge went too far in compelling it now. That question needs a more developed record, and Miles himself acknowledged he doesn't yet know if he needs it.

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The practical result: damages capped at $250,000, but the center's employees don't share in the immunity.

A significant clarification on how NJ courts sort nonprofits under the Charitable Immunity Act.

Read the full analysis: https://t.co/VF8uSb23ZT

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

NEW: The NJ Supreme Court just ruled that a Newark health center is NOT organized "exclusively for charitable purposes" even though it serves underserved populations for free.

Why? Almost none of its funding comes from charity.
Smith v. Newark Community Health Centers 🧵

[Donald Scarinci @Scarinci]

The Court looked at the "dominant motive" and did a source-of-funds analysis.

The verdict: a federally qualified health center delivering primary care regardless of ability to pay fits the definition of "hospital purposes," not charitable ones.