In re Application of Martin
New Jersey Supreme Court
447 A.2d 1290 (1982)
- Written by Brett Stavin, JD
Facts
Maria Martin (plaintiff) sought employment as a blackjack dealer at an Atlantic City casino. New Jersey’s Casino Control Act (CCA) required that Martin obtain a casino-employee license for such work, which required her to fill out an application. Martin challenged various parts of the application and the CCA on constitutional grounds. The Casino Control Commission (the commission) (defendant) agreed to modify some but not all of the application’s requirements. Because some of the challenged provisions remained, Martin appealed to the New Jersey Supreme Court. Martin argued that the application improperly required applicants to consent to warrantless searches that were unconstitutional under the Fourth Amendment; the CCA unconstitutionally authorized warrantless searches of areas outside of casino facilities such as employees’ homes; and the CCA’s search provisions did not require a proper showing of probable cause. Martin further contended it was an unconstitutional right-to-privacy infringement to require license applicants to disclose personal information and consent to the release of information from institutions such as banks, employers, and educational institutions. Martin next contended that the CCA violated applicants’ rights to free association under the First Amendment on the theory that applicants were improperly required to disclose associational ties. Finally, Martin argued that the application improperly compelled self-incrimination in violation of the Fifth Amendment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Pashman, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.