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

Chief Judge Smith Will Step Down as Chief Judge of the Third Circuit

Chief Judge Smith announced that he will be stepping down as Chief Judge. He will shortly reach age 70, the age limit for serving as Chief Judge of the Third...

For the First Week of the New Term, Appellate Division Panels Adopt Varying Practices for Oral Argument

The Appellate Division's calendar for the week of September 13, the first week of the new court Term, has been published and is available here. While it may be too...

A Practice Tip: When a Judge is Rendering an Oral Opinion, Don't Interrupt and Call Him/Her "Corrupt"

Bascom Corporation v. Paterson Coalition for Housing, Inc., 2021 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1846 (App. Div. Aug. 24, 2021). Periodically, our appellate courts offer lessons in "what not to do"...

The 2021-22 General Assignment Order

Chief Justice Rabner has issued the General Assignment Order for the coming Term. It is available here. At the Appellate Division level, the headline is that the number of Parts...

Motions to Terminate Alimony Obligations Due to Cohabitation or Remarriage Are to be Treated Like Summary Judgment Motions

Temple v. Temple, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021). When plaintiff Jeffrey Temple and defendant Cynthia Temple divorced, they entered into a marital settlement agreement, incorporated into their 2004...

Adverse Employment Action Not Required for Law Against Discrimination Claim

Richter v. Oakland Bd. of Educ., ___ N.J. ___ (2021). Justice LaVecchia wrote the opinion in this important Law Against Discrimination ("LAD") case for a unanimous Court. There were two...

New Supreme Court Appeals Raise Evidence, Workers' Compensation Act, Nominal Damages, and Affidavit of Merit Issues

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in four new matters. As is often the case, they are a varied group. In Lapsley v. Sparta Tp., the question...

Reconsideration of Final Orders vs. Reconsideration of Interlocutory Orders

Lawson v. Dewar, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021). This opinion by Judge Fisher was made on summary disposition, a rare occurrence in our appellate courts. In the first...

"Those Lazy, Hazy, Crazy Days of Summer"- Appellate Division Summer Parts

The Appellate Division's schedule of summer Parts has been published. It is available here. This year, the "summer" period runs from June 21 through September 12, divided into six two-week...

Employers are Obligated to Reimburse Employees for Medical Marijuana Treatment Reasonably Necessary to Treat Work-Related Injuries

Hager v. M&K Construction, ___ N.J. ___ (2021). As discussed here, the Appellate Division in this case affirmed the decision of a Workers Compensation judge that the defendant employer was...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 111213 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44…Last

Retired Policeman's Pension Benefits Were Wrongly Paid to His Estranged Spouse Rather Than to His Estate, Where He Had Not Designated Anyone to Receive the Pension Benefit if He Died

Isaac v. Board of Trustees, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Two kinds of benefits are payable to retired members of the.Police and Firemen's Retirement System ("PFRS"). One is a pension benefit, a part of the member's compensation for past services. Pension benefits go to the person whom the member designates, or to the member's estate if no designation is made. The other is a survivor's benefit, which goes to the member's widow for the duration of his or her widowhood. Former Newark policeman Keith Isaac made no designation as to his pension benefits, though he did list his estranged wife, Roxanne, as his spouse when he filed for retirement. Based on that, Isaac's pension benefits were distributed to Roxanne. Isaac's estate contested that, and today the Supreme Court held that the estate should have gotten the pension monies....

The Supreme Court Clarifies New Jersey's Automobile Exception to the Requirement of a Search Warrant

State v. Fenimore, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Both the United States and New Jersey Constitutions protect the people against "unreasonable searches and seizures" and prohibit the issuance of search warrants without "probable cause." Both federal and New Jersey law, however, recognize an "automobile exception" to the warrant requirement. But New Jersey's automobile exception is narrower than the federal exception, as the Supreme Court stated in State v. Witt, 223 N.J. 409 (2015). Today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Appellate Division in this case had interpreted Witt too broadly in reversing a Law Division decision to exclude evidence from a warrantless search. The Supreme Court reversed and excluded the evidence....

"Liberal Standards" for Standing "Are Not Equivalent to No Standards At All," the Supreme Court Says

New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As Justice Pierre-Louis observed in her opinion for a unanimous Court in this case today, New Jersey state courts have long "take[n] a more liberal approach to standing than federal law." But in this appeal, the statute sued upon, the Franchise Practices Act, N.J.S.A. 56:10-1 et seq. ("FPA"), stated that only a "franchisee" could sue its franchisor. Because plaintiff here ("NJCAR") was not a franchisee but an association of franchisees, NJCAR lacked standing to bring a FPA case....

Compassionate Release Act Does Not Require Physical Examination of Inmates Seeking Relief, But Denial of Relief in This Case Was Arbitrary and Capricious

M.R. v. New Jersey Department of Corrections, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Plaintiff appealed the denial of his petition for release under the Compassionate Release Act, N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.51 ("CRA"). He argued that he had not been physically examined by a physician, and that the statute required a physical examination. The Appellate Division determined that the statute did not require a physical examination and upheld the denial of compassionate release. Today, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Hoffman, the Supreme Court agreed that no physical examination was required, but reversed the denial of compassionate relief as insupportable....