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

Laches Cannot Bar a Claim That is Filed Within the Applicable Statute of Limitations

Fox v. Millman, 210 N.J. 401 (2012). This case is one of many cut from a similar pattern: an employee subject to a duty of loyalty to his employer left that job for a new...

Choice of Applicable Statutes of Limitation Under the Restatement (Second) of Conflicts of Law

Pitcock v. Kasowitz, Benson, Torres & Friedman, LLP, 426 N.J. Super. 582 (App. Div. 2012). This case arose out of a dispute between defendant, a New York law firm with a Newark...

A Rarity: A Published Appellate Division Opinion Issued Per Curiam

State v. Palma, 426 N.J. Super. 510 (App. Div. 2012). Just as we do not often see a not-for-publication opinion signed by its author, it is not usual for an opinion issued...

Only the Supreme Court, Not a Lower Court, Can Recognize a New Cause of Action

Filgueiras v. Newark Public Schools, 426 N.J. Super. 449 (App. Div. 2012). This case arose out of the allegedly improper termination of a gym teacher by Newark Public Schools. [Disclosure: My firm,...

Like it or Not, A Trial Level Judge Must Obey the Mandate of an Appellate Court

United States v. Kennedy, 682 F.3d 244 (3d Cir. 2012). In this decision, issued today and discussed here on a different subject, the Third Circuit sternly reprimanded a District of New Jersey...

Homeowners Association Cannot Ban Political Signs in Unit Windows

Mazdabrook Commons Homewoners Ass'n v. Khan, 210 N.J. 482 (2012). "The question in this appeal is whether a homeowners' association can prohibit residents from posting political signs in the windows of their...

Supreme Court Will Review State v. Morgan "Jury Homework" Case

In State v. Morgan, 423 N.J. Super. 453 (App. Div. 2011), discussed here, the Appellate Division ruled that it was not improper to permit jurors to take their written jury...

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) Means What it Says: A Final Judgment on Less Than All Claims May be Entered Only if "There is No Just Reason for Delay"

Elliott v. Archdiocese of New York, 682 F.3d 213 (3d Cir. 2012). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b) states that a district court may direct entry of a final judgment as to...

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...

A Class Action Settlement Class is Reversed for Lack of Adequate Representation, But the Third Circuit Explains How to Cure the Problem

Dewey v. Volkswagen, A.G., 681 F.3d 170 (3d Cir. 2012). This class action case involved allegations that Volkswagen vehicles had defective sunroofs that allowed water to infiltrate into the interior of the...

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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135136137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159…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....