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

Appellate Courts Can Decline to Review Arguments Made Below as to Other Issues, But Not as to the Issue Actually on Appeal

Chirino v. Proud 2 Haul, Inc., 458 N.J. Super. 308 (App. Div. 2017), aff'd o.b., 237 N.J. 440 (2019). There is a long-settled general rule that an appellate court will...

Waiver, Forfeiture, the Plain Error Doctrine, and the "Third Circuit Model Jury Instructions"

Robinson v. First State Community Action Agency, 920 F.3d 182 (3d Cir. 2019). This opinion by Judge Fuentes today affirms a plaintiff's verdict in a jury trial under the Americans...

Supreme Court Oral Argument Tips From Chief Justice Rabner

Chief justice Rabner was the guest speaker at last night's NJSBA Appellate Practice Committee meeting. He was aware that Judge Vernoia spoke at a previous meeting about appellate briefing, as...

Paul Matey is Confirmed to a Seat on the Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Yesterday, the Senate voted 54-43 to confirm Paul Matey to a seat on the Third Circuit. The vote largely followed party lines, with Senator Joe Manchin (D- WV) the only...

A Unanimous Opinion by Judge Ambro, With a Concurring Opinion by Judge Ambro and Judge Greenaway. Huh?

United States v. Reese, 917 F.3d 177 (3d Cir. 2019). The Third Circuit issued this opinion today. As Judge Ambro's opinion for the unanimous panel stated at the very beginning,...

Filing a Criminal Complaint as a Means of Collecting on an Invoice is an Unconscionable Commercial Practice That Warrants Attorneys' Fees Under the Consumer Fraud Act

Jacobs v. Lindsay and Son Plumbing and Heating, Inc., 458 N.J. Super. 194 (App. Div. 2019). The defendant in this appeal, Mark Lindsay and Son Plumbing & Heating, Inc. ("MLSP")...

Barring Owner of Two-Family Home From Leasing Both Units to Renters is Unlawful

Tirpak v. Borough of Point Pleasant Beach, 457 N.J. Super. 441 (App. Div. 2019). This per curiam opinion, issued today by a panel consisting of Judges Sabatino, Haas, and Sumners,...

The Appellate Division Confesses Error

State v. Berisha, 458 N.J. Super. 105 (App. Div. 2019). None of us likes to admit our mistakes. That includes judges, of course, though judges sometimes do change their minds,...

The Supreme Court Grants Certification in Five Cases

Late last Friday, the Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in five more cases. There are four civil appeals and one criminal matter. The criminal case is actually...

Appellate Practice Insights From Judge Vernoia

The guest speaker at last night's meeting of the NJSBA Appellate Practice Committee was Judge Vernoia. He offered some of his thoughts and insights about appellate practice and answered questions...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 161718 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

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....

Prosecutor's Prejudicial Comments During Summation Required Vacation of Conviction on Weapons and Criminal Restraint Charges

State v. Kelly, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). Judge Gummer wrote the panel's opinion in this case. The panel reversed defendant's conviction on weapons and criminal restraint charges, based on a set of facts remarkably similar to those in State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 80 (2004)....