New Jersey Section 2C:35B-2 – Findings, declarations regarding civil actions against drug dealers

New Jersey Allows People Harmed by Illegal Drugs to Sue Dealers – But It’s Complicated

New Jersey has a law that lets people who are hurt by illegal drugs sue the drug dealers who sold them. It’s called Section 2C:35B-2 and it allows people to file civil lawsuits against drug dealers for damages related to the sale or distribution of illegal drugs.

This law was passed back in the late 1990s during the height of the war on drugs. The idea was to give citizens a way to go after drug dealers directly through the civil courts, in addition to criminal charges brought by prosecutors. Supporters said it would provide another tool to fight the harm caused by the illegal drug trade.

But in the 20+ years since, the law hasn’t been used all that much. These kinds of lawsuits face significant legal hurdles that make them hard to win. Let’s break down what the law does, why it was passed, and the challenges people face in bringing these kinds of cases.

What the Law Allows

Section 2C:35B-2 lets people file a civil lawsuit for damages if they were harmed as a result of illegal drug use, possession, or distribution. The law says you can sue for:

• Economic loss – this means lost wages, medical expenses, etc.
• Loss of services – like if a family member could no longer care for children or do household work.
• Loss of society – this covers loss of companionship from someone being injured or killed.
• Pain and suffering.

The law allows you to sue anyone involved in the illegal drug market that caused the harm. This includes the dealers who directly sold the drugs, middlemen, drug kingpins who organized distribution, and anyone else involved in trafficking.

The main purpose is to allow victims of the illegal drug trade to recover monetary damages for their losses. Backers of the law said it gives citizens a way to fight back directly against drug dealers ruining their communities.

Why the Law Was Passed

Section 2C:35B-2 was passed in 1997 at the height of the war on drugs in America. The country was facing surging addiction rates, overdose deaths, and drug-related crime.

There was a push to get much tougher on illegal drugs and the people selling them. New Jersey, like many states, passed stricter criminal penalties for drug crimes.

But some thought more tools were needed. So the state passed this law to open up drug dealers to civil lawsuits as well. Supporters said it would let everyday people harmed by illegal drugs go after the dealers directly in civil court.

The law was modeled on civil remedies used against drunk drivers. Activists argued if we allow civil lawsuits against bartenders and drunk drivers who cause harm, why not illegal drug dealers too?

Challenges in Bringing Lawsuits Under 2C:35B-2

While Section 2C:35B-2 aimed to give citizens a new tool against drug dealers, there have been very few lawsuits brought under the law.

Plaintiffs face a number of major hurdles in successfully winning these kinds of civil cases:

Proving causation – Plaintiffs need to show a direct causal link between the illegal drugs sold by the defendant and the harm suffered. With illegal narcotics, there are often many steps between manufacture and street-level sales. Proving the defendant’s specific drugs led to the harm can be very difficult.

Collecting evidence – These cases rely heavily on testimony and physical evidence linking the drugs sold by the defendant to the plaintiff’s injuries. But gathering solid proof about underground illegal drug sales is extremely challenging.

Identifying defendants – Figuring out exactly who was involved in selling or distributing the specific drugs that caused the harm requires piecing together convoluted evidence about covert criminal networks. It’s a huge obstacle.

Statute of limitations – Plaintiffs generally have just 2 years to file the lawsuit from when the harm occurred. The short window makes building a strong case very tough.

Establishing damages – Plaintiffs need to prove the exact economic and personal losses suffered as a result of the illegal drugs. Quantifying this harm from illegal narcotics can be nearly impossible in many cases.

Affording lawyers – Complex civil litigation requires expensive attorneys. But many harmed by illegal drugs lack the means to hire top lawyers who can successfully bring these kinds of cases.

Defendants lack assets – Even if a plaintiff wins, collecting anything from imprisoned street-level dealers is unlikely. And kingpins hide assets well. So plaintiffs rarely recover much money.

These legal and practical hurdles help explain why there have been relatively few cases brought under Section 2C:35B-2 over the past 20+ years. While the law aimed to empower citizens, the reality of successfully winning these lawsuits has proven extremely difficult.

High-Profile Cases

There have been a handful of high-profile cases brought under Section 2C:35B-2:

• In the late 1990s, the parents of basketball star Len Bias sued their son’s drug dealers over his cocaine overdose death. But the case was dismissed for lack of evidence linking the defendants to the drugs that killed Bias.
• In the 2000s, the drug rehabilitation program Straight Inc. brought cases against multiple crack cocaine dealers. They argued the dealers’ drugs led to harm and higher treatment costs. But Straight Inc. lost at trial in proving the causation link.
• In 2015, the parents of a New Jersey woman who died from a heroin overdose sued her boyfriend for supplying the drugs. The case settled for an undisclosed amount before trial.

So while the law aimed to allow innovative lawsuits against drug dealers, in practice very few cases have seen success. The war on drugs evolved toward treatment over punishment. And this law has been used sparingly since being passed in the 1990s.

The Future of Drug Dealer Liability Lawsuits

Section 2C:35B-2 remains New Jersey law and could see renewed interest amidst the opioid epidemic. But the high legal burdens mean it’s likely to remain an infrequently used tool.

Similar laws in other states have also produced very few lawsuits. Changing attitudes toward drug crimes make these cases less appealing to many. And the practical roadblocks remain extremely daunting for potential plaintiffs.

But the law staying on the books does signal that New Jersey is still open to creative legal ways for citizens to seek justice from those who peddle harmful illegal drugs for profit. The state is willing to give victims their day in civil court.

Even if the results have been meager so far, the law upholding the principle of allowing civil damages against drug dealers remains in place. The state is willing to give victims their day in civil court.

Even if the results have been meager so far, the law upholding the principle of allowing civil damages against drug dealers remains in place. Who knows, we may see a resurgence in creative use of Section 2C:35B-2 as the opioid crisis continues destroying lives and communities.

So the law provides an option, even if a difficult one. It will be interesting to see if any victims of the opioid epidemic attempt to wield this old war on drugs law in new civil lawsuits against dealers in the years ahead.