Borough of Englewood Cliffs v. Trautner, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This appeal presented the question of whether municipalities can be liable to pay sanctions for frivolous litigation, under the Frivolous Litigation Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 ("the FLS"). In a 5-0 opinion written by Justice Fasciale (Chief Justice Rabner and Justice Hoffman did not participate), the Court affirmed, as modified, the decision of the Appellate Division that upheld the Law Division's imposition of FLS sanctions against the Borough....
State v. Bragg, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). A jury found defendant guilty of twelve charged counts, including attempted murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault, terroristic threats, possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, endangering, and two lesser-included offenses of harassment. Some of those charges involved the use of deadly force. Persons may not use deadly force if the can retreat with complete safety. But under the "castle doctrine," an exception to the general rule, a person "is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor." N.J.S.A. 2C:3-4(b)(2)(b)(i). That doctrine derives from the common law....
In the Matter of Protest Filed by El Sol Contracting and Construction Corp., Contract T100.638, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This public bidding case resulted in a 5-2 split at the Supreme Court, the first non-unanimous ruling of the current Term. Justice Hoffman wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Fasciale authored the dissent for himself and Justice Pierre-Louis....
The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in four new appeals. Three are from unpublished opinions of the Appellate Division, while the fourth is from a published decision in a criminal case....
The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in four new cases. All of them entail grants of certification. There are two civil appeals and two criminal matters....
Rappaport v. Pasternak, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Justice Patterson's opinion for a unanimous Court today arose out of the arbitration of a dispute among members of limited liability companies. After the arbitrator made his award, the Chancery Division confirmed that award. But the Appellate Division, which viewed the record as showing that the arbitrator had improperly ruled on an issue not presented by the parties, modified the award. On further review, the Supreme Court reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the Chancery Division's confirmation of the award....
The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in State v. Arrington. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office, is "Can a criminal defendant advance an insanity defense under N.J.S.A. 2C:4-1 without expert testimony?"...
On this date in 1992, the Supreme Court decided Sica v. Wall Township Board of Adjustment, 127 N.J. 152 (1992). [Disclosure: I argued this case for the successful plaintiff]. Justice Pollock's opinion for a unanimous Court addressed a question that arose out of Medici v. BPR Co., 107 N.J. 1 (1987). There, the Court held that a use variance applicant must satisfy an enhanced standard of proof that the variance is not inconsistent with the intent of the master plan and zoning ordinances. The question in Sica was whether that enhanced standard applied to inherently beneficial uses. The Court said that it did not....
Musker v. Suuchi, Inc., ___ N.J. ___ (2025). The question presented in this appeal, as stated by Justice Fasciale in his unanimous opinion, was "whether ‘commissions' are considered ‘wages' under the Wage Payment Law (WPL), N.J.S.A. 34:11-4.1 to -4.15, and are therefore subject to the WPL's protections." As summarized here, both the Law Division and the Appellate Division granted a defense motion for summary judgment, holding that "commissions" were not "wages" but were "supplementary incentives" not covered by the WPL....
It's time to catch up with the courts again. Last week, the Supreme Court issued two opinions, while the Appellate Division published one decision. Here are summaries:...