NJ Appellate Law Blog

Back in Action!

Due to travel over most of the past two weeks (and getting "back in the game" once having returned), there have been no posts here. But the courts have been...

The Limitations Period for PIP Benefits Appeals From Decisions of Dispute Resolution Professionals

Personal Service Ins. Co. v. Relievus, 455 N.J. Super. 508 (App. Div. 2018). This opinion, issued by Judge Sumners today for a unanimous panel, concerned "whether a Law Division summary...

Some Holders of Tax Sale Certificates May Have Standing to Challenge Development Approvals on Neighboring Property

Cherokee LCP Land, LLC v. Linden Planning Bd., 234 N.J. 403 (2018). The Municipal Land Use Law, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq. ("MLUL") confers standing to actions of municipal land use...

Daubert Factors (But Not Daubert) Come to New Jersey

In re Accutane Litigation, 234 N.J.340 (2018). [Disclosure: I argued this appeal, together with co-counsel, on behalf of the plaintiffs. The opinions expressed in this post are mine alone, and...

ADA Class Action Plaintiffs Win on Standing, but Lose (For Now) on Class Certification

Mielo v. Steak ‘n Shake Operations, Inc., 897 F.3d 467 (3d Cir. 2018). This was an appeal under Rule 23(f) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure from a District...

The Federal Tort Claims Act Statute of Limitations

Sconiers v. United States, 896 F.3d 595 (3d Cir. 2018). Under the Federal Tort Claims Act, 28 U.S.C. §2401(b) ("FTCA"), a tort claim against the United States is "forever barred...

Motor Vehicle Commission Wrongly Sanctioned Car Dealers Without Holding Hearings

Allstars Auto Group, Inc. v. New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission, 234 N.J. 150 (2018). The New Jersey Motor Vehicle Commission ("NJMVC") imposed fines and suspensions on eight car dealers for...

Class of Kia Vehicles Owners Was Entitled to Damages Based on Aggregate Figures Rather Than Individual Damage Assessments

Little v. Kia Motors America, Inc., 455 N.J. Super. 411 (App. Div. 2018). Class actions notoriously take a long time. But the case in which Judge Koblitz issued a decision...

Courts Find Attorneys' Fee Disputes "Hellish," Especially Where "The Adversaries Fan the Flames at Virtually Every Opportunity"

United States of America ex rel. Palmer v. C&D Technologies, Inc., 897 F.3d 128 (3d Cir. 2018). Today's opinion by Judge Greenberg (no relation) in a False Claims Act case...

The Third Circuit Clarifies CAFA's "Local Controversy Exception" on Unusual Facts

Walsh v. Defenders, Inc., 894 F.3d 583 (3d Cir. 2018). The "local controversy" exception to federal jurisdiction over putative class actions under the so-called Class Action Fairness Act of 2005,...

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 31 32 33 34 35 36 373839 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…Last

The Second and Third Published Appellate Division Decisions of the Current Term

As September turned to October, the Appellate Division issued its second and third published opinions of the Term. One was a decision by Judge Vinci in a civil appeal. The other ruling, in a criminal appeal, was authored by Judge Perez Friscia....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Did it Violate a Class Action Settlement That Barred Mass Opt-Outs to Allow Opt-Outs From a Marketing Campaign That Solicited Opt-outs?

On Tuesday, September 30, judges on Part G of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Esposito v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless. The case follows from a $100 million nationwide class action settlement that had required class members who decided to exclude themselves from the settlement and potentially pursue their own litigation against Verizon to opt out individually, and barred mass opt-outs. However, Murphy Advocates, LLC, a Colorado law firm conducted a marketing campaign to create a mass opt-out that attracted about 11,000 class members who responded to Murphy that they wished to opt out....

A Pair of New Criminal Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two new cases. Both are criminal appeals. One is from a published opinion of the Appellate Division, while the other is from an unpublished per curiam decision by a three-judge panel....

Can a Plaintiff in a Civil Case Refuse to Testify at Trial After Being Served With a Defense Notice in Lieu of Subpoena and Having Been Ordered to Testify by the Trial Judge? An Anniversary

On this date in 2005, the Supreme Court decided Gonzalez v. Safe & Sound Sec. Corp., 185 N.J. 100 (2005). The case involved a plaintiff who was shot in an apartment building in Atlantic City, which left him paralyzed. He brought a negligence suit against a number of defendants, including Atlantic City Housing & Urban Renewal Associates ("ACHURA"), the owner of the apartment building....