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

Judge Fuentes Warns: When Seeking Dismissal With Prejudice as a Discovery Sanction, "Follow the Procedural Safeguards" of Rule 4:23-5

Thabo v. Z Transportation, 452 N.J. Super. 359 (App. Div. 2017). Under Rule 4:23-5, failure to make discovery can, in certain circumstances, result in dismissal of a complaint with prejudice....

Which Appellate Deadlines Are Jurisdictional?

Hamer v. Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago, 138 S.Ct. 13 (2017). In Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007), the Supreme Court of the United States explained that an appeal...

A Case That Everyone Knows: Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., Decided 22 Years Ago Today

If there is one case that every New Jersey litigator, and even most non-litigators, know, it is Brill v. Guardian Life Ins. Co., 142 N.J. 520 (1995). That opinion, written...

Three New Grants of Review by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced yesterday that it has granted review in two new cases. The first is Willner v. Vertical Reality, Inc. The question presented there, as phrased by the...

Last-Minute Motions in Limine Cannot Properly be Used Instead of Properly Noticed Dispositive Motions

L.C. v. M.A.J., 451 N.J. Super. 408 (App. Div. 2017). In Cho v. Trinitas Regional Medical Center, 443 N.J. Super. 461 (App. Div. 2016), discussed here, Judge Espinosa wrote an...

Volunteer Fireman is Not an "Employee" of His Volunteer Fire Company for Purposes of CEPA

Sauter v. Colts Neck Volunteer Fire Co. No. 2, 451 N.J. Super. 581 (App. Div. 2017). The Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 to -14 ("CEPA") protects "employees who report...

The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee Seeks Comments on Proposed Changes to Federal Appellate Rules

The Judicial Conference Advisory Committee is seeking comments on proposed changes to the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (as well as proposed changes to other sets of federal rules). The...

The Third Circuit Grants Mandamus, and Announces a New Test for Transfer in Unusual Circumstances

In re Howmedica Osteonics Corp., 867 F.3d 390 (3d Cir. 2017). Today's opinion by Judge Krause contains a little bit of a lot of things: in no particular order, waiver,...

Three More Grants of Certification by the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced late yesterday that it has granted certification in three more cases. In the first matter, Serico v. Rothberg, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme...

"The Record on Appeal" at the NJSBA Annual Meeting

Today's seminar, which was sponsored by the NJSBA Appellate Practice Committee, took up the important topic of the record on appeal. Judge Messano, who headed up the panel, began by...

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…Last

No Ethics Violation in Attorney Purchasing Another Attorney's Name as a Keyword for Internet Searches, the Supreme Court Says, With a Caveat

In re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). [Disclosure: I represented an amicus curiae in this appeal]. As Justice Noriega said in his opinion for a 5-1 majority (Justice Pierre-Louis did not participate), this appeal "presents the narrow question of whether it is permissible under the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) for an attorney or law firm to purchase a competing attorney's or law firm's name as a keyword." The Court found it permissible, with a caveat. Justice Fasciale dissented....

Four Criminal Law Cases, and a Qui Tam Appeal, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in five new appeals. One of them is before the Court on leave to appeal, while in the others the Court granted certification....

The "Limited Attorney Exemption" of the Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act is Held Unconstitutional as Violative of the Separation of Powers and Void for Vagueness

Anchor Law Firm, PLLC v. State of New Jersey, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act, N.J.S.A. 17:16G-1 et seq. ("DACCA"), prohibits debt adjusters in New Jersey from operating for a profit. There is an exception for attorneys not "principally engaged" (a term not defined in the statute) in debt adjustment. That exception, adopted in a 1986 amendment, replaced a prior version of the DACCA that had exempted all attorneys from its scope....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Where a Party Files a Suit Alleged to Violate the UPEPA But Quickly Dismisses It, Can Defendants Then Get Counsel Fees Under the Statute?

On May 15, judges on Part C of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Satz v. Keshet Starr. Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed a defamation suit against defendants. Defendants filed an o order to show cause to dismiss the case and for attorneys' fees under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-49 et seq. ("UPEPA"). The UPEPA, enacted in 2023, sought to make it more difficult to use the legal system as a weapon to bully individuals into silence by filing what have been known as SLAPP ("strategic lawsuits against public participation") suits....