Hirsch v. New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners

607 A.2d 986, 128 N.J. 160, 1992 N.J. LEXIS 381
Supreme Court of New Jersey·Decided June 18, 1992·Published·Cited by 13 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Appellate Division rejected plaintiffs’ facial challenges to the New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners’ questionnaire that the Board had made part of New Jersey physicians’ and podiatrists’ biennial license-renewal application. We affirm the judgment below substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Coleman’s comprehensive opinion. See Hirsch v. New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners, 252 N.J.Super. 596, 600 A.2d 493 (1991). Although some of the questions on the application could benefit from reformulation to achieve a better-defined focus and to reflect a more sensitive appreciation of the privacy concerns of those who must answer, we cannot say that on this record there has been a clear demonstration of unreasonableness. We add, however, that our ruling on the facial validity of the questions should not be interpreted as an absolute bar to later consideration of a particularized claim of damage or injury by an aggrieved license-renewal applicant.

We decline to rule on so much of plaintiffs’ claims as is based on the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C.A. §§ 12101-12213, plaintiffs having first presented those claims after their petition for certification had been granted. Moreover, we are uncertain that this Court has jurisdiction over ADA-based claims if, as here, the individual [162] plaintiffs have not first filed those claims with the Department of Justice, see 28 C.F.R. §§ 35.170(c), 35.171(a)(2), 35.190(b)(6) (1991); but in that respect as well we defer a definitive ruling until presented with an appeal in which the ADA issues have been fully developed.

Judgment affirmed.

For affirmance Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI and STEIN — 7.

Opposed — none.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Hirsch v. New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners, 607 A.2d 986, 128 N.J. 160, 1992 N.J. LEXIS 381 (N.J. 1992).

607 A.2d 986 (Hirsch v. New Jersey State Board of Medical Examiners) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Cabbell
24 A.3d 758 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2011)
In Re Kim
958 A.2d 485 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2008)
State v. Wilson
833 A.2d 1087 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2003)
State Farm Indemnity Co. v. Warrington
795 A.2d 324 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 2002)
Pfenninger v. Hunterdon Central Regional High School
770 A.2d 1126 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 2001)
State v. P.Z.
703 A.2d 901 (Supreme Court of New Jersey, 1997)
James Construction Co. v. Board of Public Utilities
689 A.2d 784 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1997)
New Jersey Builders Ass'n v. Borough of Mendham
621 A.2d 985 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1993)