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

For the Second Day in a Row, A Per Curiam Affirmance on the Opinion Below by the Supreme Court

Meyers v. State Health Benefits Comm'n, 256 N.J. 94 (2023). Yesterday, the Supreme Court issued a per curiam opinion in a criminal case affirming a ruling of the Appellate Division...

The Supreme Court Affirms in State v. Rosado

State v. Rosado, 256 N.J. 93 (2023). As discussed here, the Appellate Division, in an opinion by Judge Gilson, held that a January 3, 2002 amendment to the criminal statute...

The Supreme Court Takes Up an IDEA Case

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in Board of Education of the Township of Sparta v. M.N. That is the first grant of review since October 24...

Another Short Week, and Another Catch-Up Post

In the past two weeks, an Appellate Division brief and a Supreme Court petition consumed much time. So, in this shortened Thanksgiving week, it's time to catch up on the...

Res Judicata Before Municipal Land Use Boards: An Anniversary

On this date in 1959, the Supreme Court decided Russell v. Board of Adjustment of Tenafly, 31 N.J. 58 (1959). The case is one of the earliest to address the...

The Supreme Court Takes Up a Civil Service Commission Appeal

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted certification in In the Matter of James Hartnett, Pennsauken. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office, is...

Last Week's Appellate Division Published Opinions

Preparation for an Appellate Division oral argument made it difficult to keep up with that court last week. The Appellate Division issued three published opinions during that time. (The Supreme...

A Trove of New Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in six new appeals. In two of them, the Court granted leave to appeal. The other two involved grants of certification....

The Anniversary of Louis Kamm v. Flink

On this date in 1934, the Court of Errors and Appeals, which was then New Jersey's highest court, decided Louis Kamm v. Flink, 113 N.J. L. 582 (E. & A....

Three New Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in three new appeals. All are from unpublished opinions of the Appellate Division. In Constructural Dynamics, Inc. v. Arch Insurance Co.,...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 131415 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 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146…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....