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

Child Pornography and Collateral Estoppel

Doe v. Hesketh, 828 F.3d 159 (3d Cir. 2016). Today, the Third Circuit, in an opinion by Judge Greenaway, ruled in a case of a child victim of federal crimes...

When is a Child Witness Competent to Testify?

State v. Bueso, 225 N.J. 193 (2016). Today, the Supreme Court addressed the issue of how a trial court should evaluate the competency of a child witness to testify. The...

Third Circuit Calls for Full Briefing and Oral Argument as to Disclosure of Bridgegate Unindicted Co-Conspirator List

In connection with the upcoming Bridgegate trial of Bill Baroni and Bridget Kelly, news outlets had asked Judge Wigenton, who is handling the matter in the District Court, to release...

Supreme Court Will Review LAD, Fraudulent Conveyance, and Two Criminal Cases

In addition to the Supreme Court's grant of review in a case involving the termination of a contract of sale of residential real estate, discussed here, the Court announced in...

(Likely) Coming Soon to the Supreme Court: When Does the Involvement of DNA Evidence Toll the Criminal Statute of Limitations?

State v. Twiggs, 445 N.J. Super. 23 (App. Div. 2016). In this conspiracy to commit robbery case, the Law Division dismissed the indictment because the State began the prosecution beyond...

The Fugitive Disentitlement Doctrine

Matison v. Lisnyansky, 443 N.J. Super. 549 (App. Div. 2016). This opinion by Judge Koblitz today, which dismisses the appeal, is one of the shortest published Appellate Division decision that...

Mootness, and Some Useful Reminders

State v. Ross, 441 N.J. Super. 120 (App. Div. 2015). This characteristically concise opinion by Judge Fisher involved an order by the Law Division in this criminal case that granted...

Law of the Case Doctrine Does Not Extend From One Party to Another Party Not in Privity

State v. K.P.S., 221 N.J. 266 (2015). Two defendants who had been charged in the same indictment with many of the same crimes sought to suppress certain evidence. The Law...

State v. Czachor

Thirty five years ago today, the Supreme Court decided State v. Czachor, 82 N.J. 392 (1980). In an opinion by Justice Handler, the Court revolutionized the criminal law by abandoning...

The First Opinion by Justice Solomon

State v. Jaffe, 220 N.J. 114 (2014). As discussed here, the first opinion written by a new Justice is generally a unanimous decision in a relatively unexceptional case. Today, Justice Solomon, a...

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 29 30 313233 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....