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

"Bridgegate" Wire Fraud Convictions Are Affirmed, While Civil Rights Convictions Are Reversed

United States v. Baroni, 909 F.3d 550 (3d Cir. 2018). In a unanimous opinion by Judge Scirica today, the Third Circuit upheld the convictions of "Bridgegate" defendants Bill Baroni and...

Assignor's Loss of a Mortgage Note Does Not Preclude Foreclosure by an Assignee

Investors Bank v. Torres, 457 N.J. Super. 53 (App. Div. 2018). In this foreclosure case, the plaintiff bank was the assignee of a note that was secured by a mortgage....

Flanzman v. Jenny Craig, Inc. Reissued by the Appellate Division

Flanzman v. Jenny Craig, Inc., 456 N.J. Super. 613 (App. Div. 2018). The Appellate Division previously issued its opinion in this case, written by Judge Fasciale, on October 17, 2018,...

No Meeting of the Minds Where Arbitration Clause Did Not Specify Arbitration Forum or Process

Flanzman v. Jenny Craig, Inc., 456 N.J. Super. 613 (App. Div. 2018). This opinion by Judge Fasciale today is yet another case arising out of an arbitration clause. Plaintiff, having...

The Litigation Privilege Applies to Statements, Not to Omissions in Notices of Intent to Foreclose

Wright v. Bank of America, N.A., 456 N.J. Super. 328 (App. Div. 2018). This short opinion by Judge Fisher reversed a decision of the Law Division that dismissed plaintiff's Complaint...

"Wants" vs. "Needs" and the Fair Housing Amendments Act

Vorchheimer v. The Philadelphian Owners Association, 903 F.3d 100 (3d Cir. 2018). Today's opinion by Judge Bibas focuses on what is "necessary" for purposes of the Fair Housing Amendments Act,...

SLUSA Does Not Bar Investors' Claims That Broker Overcharged Them to Execute Securities Transactions

Taksir v. The Vanguard Group, 903 F.3d 95 (3d Cir. 2018). As relevant to this appeal, the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998, 15 U.S.C. §78bb ("SLUSA"), states that...

Unlike Municipal License Fees for Landlords, Municipal Fees to Defray Costs of Inspecting Apartment Units Are Authorized

Cona v. Township of Washington, 456 N.J. Super. 197 (App. Div. 2018). In Timber Glen Phase III, LLC v. Hamilton Tp., 441 N.J. Super. 514 (App. Div. 2015), the Appellate...

The Business Judgment Rule and Planned Residential Communities

Alloco v. Ocean Beach and Bay Club, 456 N.J. Super. 124 (App. Div. 2018). This opinion by Judge Leone focuses on the business judgment rule and its applicability in the...

State University Development Proposals: A Tweak to Rutgers v. Piluso

Montclair State University v. County of Passaic, 234 N.J. 434 (2018). This case centered on the proper application of Rutgers v. Piluso, 60 N.J. 142 (1972). As discussed here, in...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 212223 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45…Last

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....

The Supreme Court Confirms That Municipalities Can be Subjected to Sanctions for Frivolous Litigation

Borough of Englewood Cliffs v. Trautner, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This appeal presented the question of whether municipalities can be liable to pay sanctions for frivolous litigation, under the Frivolous Litigation Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 ("the FLS"). In a 5-0 opinion written by Justice Fasciale (Chief Justice Rabner and Justice Hoffman did not participate), the Court affirmed, as modified, the decision of the Appellate Division that upheld the Law Division's imposition of FLS sanctions against the Borough....