As September turned to October, the Appellate Division issued its second and third published opinions of the Term. One was a decision by Judge Vinci in a civil appeal. The other ruling, in a criminal appeal, was authored by Judge Perez Friscia....
On this date in 2005, the Supreme Court decided Gonzalez v. Safe & Sound Sec. Corp., 185 N.J. 100 (2005). The case involved a plaintiff who was shot in an apartment building in Atlantic City, which left him paralyzed. He brought a negligence suit against a number of defendants, including Atlantic City Housing & Urban Renewal Associates ("ACHURA"), the owner of the apartment building....
Tomorrow, September 16, judges on Part B of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Cintron v. Brink's, Incorporated. That is a hostile work environment case brought under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 et seq....
The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in four new cases. Two of them are criminal matters. The other two involve eminent domain issues. One of the criminal appeals is before the Court on leave to appeal, the second grant of leave to appeal in the current Term. The Court granted certification in the other three matters....
Alcantara v. Moro, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). Judge Smith authored this opinion for the Appellate Division, that court's first published opinion of the new Term. The appeal was from a final decision of the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Education that the School Funding Reform Act, N.J.S.A. 8A:7F-43 et seq. ("SFRA"), was constitutional as applied to the Township of Lakewood....
The 2024-25 Term ends on August 29. In this penultimate week of the Term, there were no Supreme Court opinions. There were, however, two published decisions from the Appellate Division, one a civil case involving "the latest development in the ongoing controversy surrounding black bear hunting in New Jersey" and the other a criminal appeal centering on constitutional rights associated with a cellphone passcode. Here are summaries of those opinions:...
This week saw one case decided by the Supreme Court and two published opinions of the Appellate Division. The Supreme Court case, decided by a 6-1 vote, presented an ex post facto issue arising out of amendments to the statute governing parole. The two Appellate Division decisions entailed more "core" criminal law issues. Here are summaries of those cases:...
State v. Taylor, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(c), a part of the Graves Act, makes the use or possession of a firearm during the commission, attempted commission, or flight from the commission of certain designated offenses a sentencing factor that triggers the imposition of a mandatory term of imprisonment. A later-added section of the Graves Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.2, creates an "escape valve," under which a prosecutor may seek from the court a waiver of the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence where the prosecutor believes that such a sentence would not serve the interest of justice....
Chipola v. Flannery, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As discussed here, this case was one of two that the Supreme Court agreed to review in its first grants of review of the current Term. The question presented was "Does a claim alleging false light invasion of privacy have a one-year statute of limitations, see Swan v. Boardwalk Regency Corp., 407 N.J. Super. 108 (App. Div 2009)?" Today, agreeing with the Law Division and the Appellate Division, the Supreme Court answered "yes."...
State v. Cromedy, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). The Graves Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(c), prescribes a minimum term of incarceration for firearm-related offenses under certain subsections of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5, as well as a mandatory period of parole ineligibility. In this case, the issue was whether a weapons offense conviction of violation of N.J.S.A. 2C:39-5(j) is covered by the Graves Act. The Law Division and the Appellate Division each held that it was. The Supreme Court reversed in a unanimous opinion by Justice Noriega....
