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

A "Bright-Line Directive": Post-Verdict, Ex Parte Communications Between a Judge and Jury Are Always Forbidden

Davis v. Husain, 220 N.J. 270 (2014). "Post-verdict ex parte communication between the trial court and jurors cannot be countenanced." That is the holding of today's opinion, for a unanimous Supreme...

No Sufficient Findings Below, So No Appellate Ruling on Constitutional Challenge to Advance Voter Registration Statute

Rutgers University Student Assembly v. Middlesex Cty. Bd. of Elections, 438 N.J. Super. 93 (App. Div. 2014). Plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of N.J.S.A. 19:31-6.3b, which, as Judge Haas described it...

What Are the Odds (of Getting Any Given Appellate Division Judge on an Appeal)?

In an article in Tuesday's New York Times, Adam Liptak reported that opponents of same-sex marriage are challenging the composition of Ninth Circuit panels that have heard cases involving gay...

The Courier Font

Rule 2:6-10, which addresses the format of appellate briefs, states (among other things) that Supreme Court of New Jersey and Appellate Division briefs "shall contain no more than 26 double-spaced lines...

Supreme Court Will Review State v. Buckner (Recall Judges Case)

Yesterday, as expected, the Supreme Court announced that an appeal as of right has been filed, and had been accepted by the Supreme Court, in State v. Buckner, 437 N..J....

What Does "Annual" Mean?

In re Petition of BofI Federal Bank to Assign Lottery Prize Payment Rights, 437 N.J. Super. 549 (App. Div. 2014). These consolidated cases called on the Appellate Division to decide whether...

The New Jersey Law Journal Ranks the Appellate Division Judges

This week's New Jersey Law Journal contains the result of a Law Journal survey of practitioners who were asked to rate the judges of the Appellate Division in nine separate...

Last Night's MCBA Appellate Practice Seminar: A Big Hit

Last night, the Morris County Bar Association presented "New Jersey Appellate Practice: Tips from the Bench and Bar." The program and participants were discussed here. Roughly 125 people attended, and...

The Beat Goes On: Another Appellate Division Win for LDG and the City of Hoboken

Bloomfield 206 Corp. v. City of Hoboken, 2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 2175 (App. Div. Sept. 4, 2014). It is not the goal of this blog to publicize the successes of...

Check Out the ABA's 18th Annual Class Actions Institute- October 23-24, 2014, in Chicago

The 18th Annual American Bar Association Class Actions Institute will take place on October 23 and 24 at theWit Hotel in Chicago. The full brochure for the Institute can be found...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 282930 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44…Last

The Supreme Court Clarifies New Jersey's Automobile Exception to the Requirement of a Search Warrant

State v. Fenimore, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Both the United States and New Jersey Constitutions protect the people against "unreasonable searches and seizures" and prohibit the issuance of search warrants without "probable cause." Both federal and New Jersey law, however, recognize an "automobile exception" to the warrant requirement. But New Jersey's automobile exception is narrower than the federal exception, as the Supreme Court stated in State v. Witt, 223 N.J. 409 (2015). Today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Appellate Division in this case had interpreted Witt too broadly in reversing a Law Division decision to exclude evidence from a warrantless search. The Supreme Court reversed and excluded the evidence....

"Liberal Standards" for Standing "Are Not Equivalent to No Standards At All," the Supreme Court Says

New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As Justice Pierre-Louis observed in her opinion for a unanimous Court in this case today, New Jersey state courts have long "take[n] a more liberal approach to standing than federal law." But in this appeal, the statute sued upon, the Franchise Practices Act, N.J.S.A. 56:10-1 et seq. ("FPA"), stated that only a "franchisee" could sue its franchisor. Because plaintiff here ("NJCAR") was not a franchisee but an association of franchisees, NJCAR lacked standing to bring a FPA case....

Compassionate Release Act Does Not Require Physical Examination of Inmates Seeking Relief, But Denial of Relief in This Case Was Arbitrary and Capricious

M.R. v. New Jersey Department of Corrections, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Plaintiff appealed the denial of his petition for release under the Compassionate Release Act, N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.51 ("CRA"). He argued that he had not been physically examined by a physician, and that the statute required a physical examination. The Appellate Division determined that the statute did not require a physical examination and upheld the denial of compassionate release. Today, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Hoffman, the Supreme Court agreed that no physical examination was required, but reversed the denial of compassionate relief as insupportable....

Prosecutor's Prejudicial Comments During Summation Required Vacation of Conviction on Weapons and Criminal Restraint Charges

State v. Kelly, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). Judge Gummer wrote the panel's opinion in this case. The panel reversed defendant's conviction on weapons and criminal restraint charges, based on a set of facts remarkably similar to those in State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 80 (2004)....