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

Grant of Post-Conviction Relief Does Not Constitute "Exoneration" So As To Trigger the Statute of Limitations for a Legal Malpractice Claim

Rogers v. Cape May County Office of the Public Defender, 208 N.J. 414 (2011). Rogers sought to sue his public defender attorney for legal malpractice after Rogers's application for post-conviction relief was...

The Bear Hunt is On

Animal Protection League of New Jersey v. New Jersey Dep't of Environmental Protection, 423 N.J. Super. 549 (App. Div. 2011). With the coming of this season often comes an effort by the...

Settling the Record- Rule 2:5-5(a)

State v. Yough, 208 N.J. 385 (2011). The main focus of this opinion by Justice Albin was whether the Law Division abused its discretion in declining to grant a mistrial when a...

The Appellate Division Denies a Stay Pending Appeal in DePascale

On November 18, an Appellate Division panel consisting of Judges Carchman, Fisher and Nugent denied the State's motion for a stay pending the appeal, now before the Supreme Court on...

"Appropriate Equitable Relief" Under ERISA is Qualified by Equitable Defenses and Limitations

US Airways, Inc. v. McCutchen, 663 F.3d 671 (3d Cir. 2011). After defendant McCutchen suffered a serious auto accident, a benefit plan administered by plaintiff US Airways paid him nearly $67,000 for his...

Direct Certification of Cases by the Supreme Court, Bypassing the Appellate Division

The Supreme Court's grant last Thursday of direct certification of the judges' pension case, DePascale v. New Jersey, has generated some controversy. Governor Christie, for example, criticized the Court for preempting Appellate Division review....

U.S. Supreme Court Will Review "Obamacare" Cases

Nine minutes ago, the Supreme Court of the United States announced that among the cases it will take up are three cases involving the constitutionality of the Patient Protection and Affordable...

Supreme Court Oversight of Bar Applicants' Character and Fitness

Often overlooked is the fact that the Supreme Court of New Jersey is more than just the court of last resort for state court appeals. Under Article VI, section 2,...

Supreme Court Grants Direct Certification in DePascale v. New Jersey (Judges' Pension Contribution Case)

Today, the Supreme Court issued an order granting direct certification in DePascale v. New Jersey. The question presented, as summarized by the Supreme Court Clerk's Office, is "as applied to certain justices and judges,...

A Very Appropriate Case for Election Day, November 8

Since today, November 8, is Election Day, what better case could there be to highlight than In re Contest of November 8, 2005, 192 N.J. 546 (2007)? Not only did that...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 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 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133134135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146…Last

A Municipal Court Administrator is Employed by the Township, Not the Administrative Office of the Courts

Palmisano v. State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The opening paragraph of Judge Marczyk's opinion for the Appellate Division well encapsulates what the appeal was about and what the result was. "Plaintiff Lindsay Palmisano appeals from the trial court's April 1, 2024 order dismissing her complaint with prejudice against defendant State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts and Municipal Division (AOC) pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(e). The primary issue on appeal is whether plaintiff, a municipal court administrator, is an employee of the AOC, thereby allowing her to assert a claim against the AOC under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49. Based on our review of the record and the applicable legal principles, we conclude plaintiff was employed by Vernon Township (Township), not the AOC, and, therefore, we affirm."...

Supreme Court to Take Up Two Published Appellate Division Opinions

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in two new appeals. One is before the Court on leave to appeal. The Court granted certification in the other matter....

South Seaside Park Can Detach Itself From Berkeley Township

Whiteman v. Township Council of Berkeley Township, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). South Seaside Park is a small (490 year-round residents) barrier island community that has been annexed to the Township of Berkeley ("the Township"). South Seaside Park sought to deannex itself from the Township and to be annexed instead to the Borough of Seaside Park. South Seaside Park followed a statutory petitioning procedure in doing so. The Township refused consent. South Seaside Park went to court and won a ruling from the Law Division that rejected the Township's refusal. The Appellate Division affirmed. Yesterday, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Patterson, the Supreme Court affirmed as well....

Megan's Law "Not Likely to Pose a Threat to the Safety of Others" Extends to Non-Sexual as Well as Sexual Re-Offenses

In re Registrant S.O., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This appeal presented a pure legal issue relating to the "public safety prongs" contained in the termination provisions of Megan's Law, N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(f), and the Community Supervision for Life statute ("CSL"), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.4(c). Judge Vanek crystallized that "novel" issue as "whether, on a registrant's application to terminate Megan's Law and CSL obligations, the phrase ‘not likely to pose a threat to the safety of others' should be broadly interpreted with the trial court considering threats to safety from subsequent non-sexual and sexual offenses or whether the inquiry should be limited to the threat of sexual re-offense only." The panel held that the broader view was the correct one....