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

A Supreme Court Civil Opinion About Appealability, and an Appellate Division Criminal Decision About a Deported Defendant's Failure to Appear at a Pretrial Conference

Brehme v. Irwin, 259 N.J.505 (2025). One might intuitively think that a plaintiff who accepts full payment of a civil judgment for damages from an auto accident including pain and suffering, disability, impairment, loss of enjoyment of life, and past lost wages, and signs a warrant to satisfy judgment cannot then an appeal a ruling on a motion in limine that barred evidence of future medical expenses....

January, So Far

With the coming of the new year, this blog went onto a new platform. That fact, along with a Supreme Court oral argument and a Committee on Character hearing last week, has left this blog behind as 2025 begins. Our appellate courts, however, have been active. Here are summaries of their January 2025 published opinions to date:...

Governor Murphy Nominates Michael Noriega to the Supreme Court

Today, Governor Murphy announced his nomination of Michael Noriega to the Supreme Court. He would fill the seat that was vacated when Justice Albin reached the mandatory retirement age of...

Two Grants of Leave to Appeal, and One Grant of Certification, by the Supreme Court

Supreme Court grants of certification far outnumber grants of leave to appeal. But not this time. The Supreme Court announced two grants of leave to appeal, both in criminal cases,...

Another Permutation of "Legal Duty and Tort Liability in a Drunk Driving Context"

Diaz v. Reynoso, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021). Near the beginning of his opinion for the Appellate Division today, Judge Sabatino succinctly stated the issue in this case:...

Two New Supreme Court Cases: A Direct Certification and an Appeal as of Right

The Supreme Court announced today that two more cases have been added to its docket. In one of them, the Court granted direct certification and ordered an accelerated schedule. The...

Two Grants of Certification and a Solicitation for Amicus Briefs by the Supreme Court

All New Jersey state and federal courts are closed today for Columbus Day. But late last Friday, the Supreme Court announced that it had granted review in two more criminal...

As 2018 Winds Down, the Supreme Court Adds Six More Cases

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in six more cases as 2018 is coming to a close. As is often the case, the new appeals represent a...

The Supreme Court Grants Review in Five More Cases

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in five more cases. One of those is a land use matter. The other four run the gamut from administrative law...

Four New Supreme Court Grants of Review: Criminal Law, OPRA, and Self-Critical Analysis Privilege

The Supreme Court announced this morning that it has granted review in four more cases. Two of them address discovery issues, and two involve criminal matters. In Brugaletta v. Garcia,...

123…Last

Four New Criminal Appeals, and a Lone Civil Matter, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in five new appeals. Four of them are criminal cases and one is a civil appeal....

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....

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....