NJ Appellate Law Blog

A Busy Few Weeks for the Appellate Division

In the last several weeks, this blog has largely focused on Supreme Court decisions and grants of review. That was not meant to slight the Appellate Division, whose judges have...

" … And the Livin' is Eas[ier]": Appellate Division Summer Parts for 2019

The summer schedule for the Appellate Division was announced late yesterday. The Order of Chief Justice Rabner that contains the full schedule is available here. "Summer" (a term not actually...

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,...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 171819 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…Last

The Fifteenth Anniversary of New Jersey Appellate Law Blog

Tomorrow, October 18, is the fifteenth anniversary of this blog. Over 2,400 posts have appeared here during that time....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Where Should Municipalities' Challenges Relating to the Fourth Round Affordable Housing Law, P.L. 2024, c. 2, Be Heard?

On Wednesday, October 22, judges on Part B of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Borough of Montvale v. State of New Jersey. The case is before the Appellate Division on a grant of leave to appeal....

The Second and Third Published Appellate Division Decisions of the Current Term

As September turned to October, the Appellate Division issued its second and third published opinions of the Term. One was a decision by Judge Vinci in a civil appeal. The other ruling, in a criminal appeal, was authored by Judge Perez Friscia....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Did it Violate a Class Action Settlement That Barred Mass Opt-Outs to Allow Opt-Outs From a Marketing Campaign That Solicited Opt-outs?

On Tuesday, September 30, judges on Part G of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Esposito v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless. The case follows from a $100 million nationwide class action settlement that had required class members who decided to exclude themselves from the settlement and potentially pursue their own litigation against Verizon to opt out individually, and barred mass opt-outs. However, Murphy Advocates, LLC, a Colorado law firm conducted a marketing campaign to create a mass opt-out that attracted about 11,000 class members who responded to Murphy that they wished to opt out....