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

Mass Tort Defendants May Retain as Experts Doctors Who Treated Patient-Plaintiffs, But Those Doctors Cannot be Involved in the Cases of Those Same Patient-Plaintiffs

In re Pelvic Mesh-Gynecare Litig., 426 N.J. Super. 167 (App. Div. 2012). In this mass tort matter involving medical devices that are used to treat pelvic organ prolapse and stress urinary incontinence, the...

The Boundaries of Expert Opinion

State v. Locascio, 425 N.J. Super. 474 (App. Div. 2012). Expert opinion is an area in which decisions in the criminal realm find their way into civil cases as well. For example, Kemp...

Front Pay

Quinlan v. Curtiss-Wright Corp., 425 N.J. Super. 335 (App. Div. 2012). This is a long-running employment discrimination case that came back to the Appellate Division after a remand by the Supreme Court....

Independent of AT&T v. Concepcion, Arbitration Clauses in Consumer Contract Are Ineffective If They Conflict With Each Other

NAACP of Camden County East v. Foulke Management Corp., 421 N.J. Super. 404 (App. Div. 2011). This consumer class action was the occasion for another typically scholarly opinion by Judge Sabatino. Geraldine...

"Submerged" Forum Selection Clause on Seller's Website is Presumptively Unenforceable

Hoffman v. Supplements Togo Management, LLC, 419 N.J. Super. 596 (App. Div. 2011). In Caspi v. Microsoft Network, LLC, 323 N.J. Super. 118 (App. Div. 1999), the Appellate Division upheld a forum selection...

"Shall" We? Is it "Necessary"?

In re State Bd. of Education's Denial of Petition to Adopt Regulations Implementing the New Jersey High School Voter Registration Law, 2011 WL 1529734 (App. Div. 2011). Public interest organizations submitted a...

One Plaintiff is a Catalyst for Relief, But Another Plaintiff is Not

Smith v. Hudson County Register, 2011 WL 1529730 (App. Div. April 25, 2011). This opinion, by Judge Sabatino, applied the catalyst doctrine to an Open Public Records Act ("OPRA") case. In Mason...

Poetic Justice?

Mosteller v. Naiman, 416 N.J. Super. 632 (App. Div. 2010). In this decision about the proper way to measure damages for destruction of trees on a property not occupied...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011

The Term's Penultimate Week: Two Published Appellate Division Decisions

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:...

The Week Just Ending: Three Criminal Law Decisions

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:...

The 2025 Omnibus Court Rule Amendments and Other Changes

The Supreme Court announced amendments to Court Rules and appendices, as well as certain other procedural changes. That announcement is embodied in an Omnibus Rule Amendment Order that is available here....

"Abuse of Discretion" vs. "Patent and Gross Abuse of Discretion"

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....