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

The Supreme Court in the Second Half of November

After a first half of November with no Supreme Court opinions, the Court issued five opinions in the second half. Two of those decisions were discussed here and here. This...

Trial Judges Have Discretion in What Order to Address Suppression Motions in the Family Part or Waivers to the Criminal Part in Criminal Cases Involving Juveniles Sought to be Tried as Adults

State ex rel. E.S., 252 N.J. 331 (2022). As discussed here, last year the Appellate Division addressed the "unsettled" question of which should come first in a criminal case involving a...

Fraud in the Inducement Claim Won't Defeat Forum Selection Clause Unless Fraud Involved That Clause Specifically

Largoza v. FKM Real Estate Holdings, Inc., 252 N.J. Super. 331 (App. Div. 2022). A line of federal cases that includes Prima Paint Corp. v. Flood & Conklin Mfg. Co., 388...

One More Criminal Case for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in another criminal matter, a robbery case. The appeal is State v. Watson, and the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme...

Judge Sumners Will Become Presiding Judge of Appellate Division Part F on November 29

As discussed here, Judge Fisher, the Presiding Judge of the Appellate Division's Part F, will reach mandatory retirement age on November 29. Chief Justice Rabner has now announced that, as of...

Admitted Violation of Defendant's Miranda Rights, Which is Presumed to be Harmful Error, Was Not Harmless in This Case

State v. Wade, 252 N.J. 209 (2022). As Justice Solomon said in his unanimous opinion for the Supreme Court today in this murder case, New Jersey courts "rarely find an...

Three New Supreme Court Grants of Review

The Supreme Court announced that it will consider three new matters. Two of those involved grants of certification, while the third was an appeal as of right. The appeal as...

Statutory Limit on Removed Municipal Administrator's "Salary" Applies to "Severance"

Carelli v. Borough of Caldwell, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2022). N.J.S.A. 40A:9-138 deals with the removal of a municipal administrator from office. The statute provides for a resolution...

A Licensed Practical Nurse is Not a "Licensed Person" Under the Affidavit of Merit Statute

Gilligan v. Junod, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2022). As Judge Gilson stated in his opinion for the Appellate Division today, this case "present[ed] a question of first impression:...

New Jersey's Liberal Interpretation of Election Laws Has Benefited Both Parties

Today is Election Day. In many jurisdictions, litigation efforts to restrict voting or voter choice are already underway and more litigation is being threatened. New Jersey's Supreme Court, however, has...

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 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146…Last

A Municipal Court Administrator is Employed by the Township, Not the Administrative Office of the Courts

Palmisano v. State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The opening paragraph of Judge Marczyk's opinion for the Appellate Division well encapsulates what the appeal was about and what the result was. "Plaintiff Lindsay Palmisano appeals from the trial court's April 1, 2024 order dismissing her complaint with prejudice against defendant State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts and Municipal Division (AOC) pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(e). The primary issue on appeal is whether plaintiff, a municipal court administrator, is an employee of the AOC, thereby allowing her to assert a claim against the AOC under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49. Based on our review of the record and the applicable legal principles, we conclude plaintiff was employed by Vernon Township (Township), not the AOC, and, therefore, we affirm."...

Supreme Court to Take Up Two Published Appellate Division Opinions

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in two new appeals. One is before the Court on leave to appeal. The Court granted certification in the other matter....

South Seaside Park Can Detach Itself From Berkeley Township

Whiteman v. Township Council of Berkeley Township, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). South Seaside Park is a small (490 year-round residents) barrier island community that has been annexed to the Township of Berkeley ("the Township"). South Seaside Park sought to deannex itself from the Township and to be annexed instead to the Borough of Seaside Park. South Seaside Park followed a statutory petitioning procedure in doing so. The Township refused consent. South Seaside Park went to court and won a ruling from the Law Division that rejected the Township's refusal. The Appellate Division affirmed. Yesterday, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Patterson, the Supreme Court affirmed as well....

Megan's Law "Not Likely to Pose a Threat to the Safety of Others" Extends to Non-Sexual as Well as Sexual Re-Offenses

In re Registrant S.O., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This appeal presented a pure legal issue relating to the "public safety prongs" contained in the termination provisions of Megan's Law, N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(f), and the Community Supervision for Life statute ("CSL"), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.4(c). Judge Vanek crystallized that "novel" issue as "whether, on a registrant's application to terminate Megan's Law and CSL obligations, the phrase ‘not likely to pose a threat to the safety of others' should be broadly interpreted with the trial court considering threats to safety from subsequent non-sexual and sexual offenses or whether the inquiry should be limited to the threat of sexual re-offense only." The panel held that the broader view was the correct one....