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

Supreme Court Will Review a Defamation Case, a Vehicle Search Case, and a Warrantless Entry Case

The Supreme Court announced today the addition to three more cases to its docket. The first of those appeals comes from a published opinion of the Appellate Division. Petro-Lubricant Testing...

Two More Supreme Court Grants of Review Announced Today

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in two more appeals. One case involves unemployment benefits, a subject that the Court visits only occasionally. The other is...

The Supreme Court Will Review a UCC Case, an Important Discovery Issue, and Another Criminal Case

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in three more cases. In Granata v. Broderick, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's Office, is "Among...

A Murder and Arson Case for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in State v. Prall. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's Office, is "In this trial for murder...

Another Child Abuse and Neglect Case, and a Criminal Case With Constitutional Law Issues, Will be Before the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in two new cases. The first, New Jersey Division of Child Protection & Permanency v. A.B., is before the Court...

The Effect of United States Supreme Court Dicta

Coleman v. Superintendent Greene SCI, 845 F.3d 73 (3d Cir. 2017). Today, Judge Hardiman, writing for the Third Circuit in a habeas corpus case, addressed the weight to be given...

Mandatory Electronic Filing of Pretrial Detention Appeals Begins on January 1, 2017

This morning, the Appellate Division issued a Notice to the Bar, available here, to remind practitioners and appellants that, effective on January 1, 2017, appeals to the Appellate Division on...

Volunteer Emergency Medical Technician is Not a "Public Servant" for Purposes of the Official Misconduct Statute

State v. Morrison, 227 N.J. 295 (2016). In today's unanimous opinion by Justice Albin, the issue was whether a volunteer emergency medical technician ("EMT") is a "public servant" who can...

A New Rule, 2:9-14, is Promulgated Regarding Supreme Court Review of Orders Granting Pretrial Detention

This morning, the Supreme Court published a notice to the Bar, available here, regarding a new Court Rule that addresses review by the Court of Appellate Division rulings regarding pretrial...

The Supreme Court Will Review a Big Constitutional Law Case, Three Criminal Appeals, and an Insurance Coverage Case

This morning, the Supreme Court announced that it will review five more cases. Three of those are criminal cases, one is an insurance coverage case, and one is a constitutional...

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 28 293031 32 33 34…Last

Retired Policeman's Pension Benefits Were Wrongly Paid to His Estranged Spouse Rather Than to His Estate, Where He Had Not Designated Anyone to Receive the Pension Benefit if He Died

Isaac v. Board of Trustees, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Two kinds of benefits are payable to retired members of the.Police and Firemen's Retirement System ("PFRS"). One is a pension benefit, a part of the member's compensation for past services. Pension benefits go to the person whom the member designates, or to the member's estate if no designation is made. The other is a survivor's benefit, which goes to the member's widow for the duration of his or her widowhood. Former Newark policeman Keith Isaac made no designation as to his pension benefits, though he did list his estranged wife, Roxanne, as his spouse when he filed for retirement. Based on that, Isaac's pension benefits were distributed to Roxanne. Isaac's estate contested that, and today the Supreme Court held that the estate should have gotten the pension monies....

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....