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

The 2018-19 General Assignment Order

Chief Justice Rabner has issued the General Assignment Order for 2018-19. It is available here. The Appellate Division lineup again features Judge Messano as Presiding Judge for Administration and Judge...

Allocation Among Multiple Defendants of Attorneys' Fees Under Fee-Shifting Statutes

Empower our Neighborhoods v. Guadagno, 453 N.J. Super. 565 (App. Div. 2018). This was an election case under the federal and New Jersey civil rights acts, both of which provide...

The General Assignment Order for 2017-18

Today, the 2017-18 General Assignment Order issued by Chief Justice Rabner was published. It is available here. Judge Messano continues as Presiding Judge for Administration, and Judge Sabatino remains the...

The 2016-2017 General Assignment Order

Today, Chief Justice Rabner issued the 2016-2017 General Assignment Order, which is available here. This document contains the assignments of all Superior and Tax Court judges for the coming term....

PERC Cannot Unilaterally Abandon the "Dynamic Status Quo Doctrine"

In re County of Atlantic, 445 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div. 2016). The Public Employment Relations Commission ("PERC") is a state agency that is charged by the Legislature with implementing...

OPRA Demand for Information About Certain Out-of-State Travel by Governor Christie Was Properly Denied

Lagerkvist v. Office of the Governor, 443 N.J. Super. 230 (App. Div. 2015). Plaintiff, a journalist, made a request under the Open Public Records Act, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq. ("OPRA")...

The Appellate Division Lineup for 2015-16

Chief Justice Rabner has issued the General Assignment Order for 2015-16. The full Order, whose assignments take effect on September 1, 2015, can be viewed here. As far as the Appellate Division...

No Constitutional Right to Encroach on State Property

State v. Cherry Hilll Mitsubishi, Inc., 439 N.J. Super. 462 (App. Div. 2015). The State brought a summary action against the defendant car dealers, alleging that those dealers had been encroaching on...

Administrative Closure of Case Does Not Necessarily Trigger Time to Appeal

McGlynn v. State of New Jersey, 434 N.J. Super. 23 (App. Div. 2014). This was a negligence and wrongful death case. Suit was brought against various defendants, including Jersey Central Power...

Argument Not Raised Below, and Raised on Appeal Only in a Footnote, Would Not be Considered

Oyola v. Liu, 431 N.J. Super. 493 (App. Div. 2013). The main thrust of this opinion by Judge Alvarez was to affirm a decision of the Law Division that granted summary...

123…Last

The Last Seven Days

The last seven days, an especially busy period for me, featured one Supreme Court opinion and two published Appellate Division decisions. Here are summaries of those rulings:...

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....