NJ Appellate Law Blog – NJ Appellate Lawyer Bruce D. Greenberg blogs about Appeals and Appellate Law Practice

Another Big Win for the Hoboken Rent Board

Heyert v. Taddese, 431 N.J. Super. 388 (App. Div. 2013). [Disclosure: My firm, Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC, represented the Hoboken Rent Leveling & Stabilization Board in this appeal and in the other...

Recalling the Dawn of Modern Consumer Protection Law

On this date fifty three years ago, the Supreme Court decided Henningsen v. Bloomfield Motors, Inc., 32 N.J. 358 (1960). In a unanimous opinion of over 50 pages, the longest...

A Class Action Plaintiff Must be a Member of the Class That He or She Seeks to Represent

Rosen v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 430 N.J. Super. 97 (App. Div. 2013). The holding of this decision affirmed a defense motion to dismiss this putative class action case for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff had...

Consumer Fraud Act Claim Against For-Profit Technical College May Proceed

Suarez v. Eastern International College, 428 N.J. Super. 10 (App. Div. 2012). Plaintiff enrolled at the defendant for-profit college, in its diagnostic medical ultrasound technician program. A school representative told...

Shelton v. Restaurant.com to be Re-Argued in the Supreme Court of New Jersey

In Shelton v. Restaurant.com, Inc., the Supreme Court of New Jersey took the relatively rare step of accepting questions certified to it by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. That...

Supreme Court Grants Review of Hoffman v. Supplements Togo

Today, the Supreme Court announced that it had granted certification to review the Appellate Division's decision in Hoffman v. Supplements Togo Management, LLC, 419 N.J. Super. 596 (App. Div. 2011). The...

Supreme Court Reaffirms Rendine, Rejects Perdue v. Kenny A.

Walker v. Giuffre, 209 N.J. 124 (2012). In Walker and Humphries v. Powder Mill Shopping Plaza, two different Appellate Division panels had each ruled that restrictive principles governing attorneys' fee awards under federal fee-shifting statutes, as...

"Legal Gymnastics" and "Undisclosed Legerdemain" Do Not Help the Defendant in a Consumer Fraud Case

Dugan v. TGI Friday's, 2011 WL 5041391 (App. Div. Oct. 25, 2011). Plaintiff bought a beer at the bar of a TGI Friday's restaurant and was charged $2.00. She then moved...

A Questionable Consumer Fraud Act Decision

Princeton Healthcare System v. Netsmart New York, Inc., 422 N.J. Super. 467 (App. Div. 2011). This opinion, written by Judge Skillman, involves "a negotiated contract between corporations for the installation and implementation...

A "Creepy" Landmark Case

On September 2, 1971, 40 years ago today, an exterminator wrote to Donald Krobatsch to advise that the house that Krobatsch and his wife had contracted to buy from Natalie...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 13…Last

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....

The Supreme Court Confirms That Municipalities Can be Subjected to Sanctions for Frivolous Litigation

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....

The "Castle Doctrine"

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....

No Arbitrariness in Rejection of Public Construction Bid That Failed to Include a Properly Signed, Required Consent of Surety

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....