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

Two Statutory Interpretation Decisions: One Involving Discipline of a Tenured Teacher and the Other About Unemployment Tax Payments for Court Reporters

Yesterday, the Supreme Court decided Sanjuan v. School District of West New York, 256 N.J. 369 (2024). There, plaintiff, a long-serving teacher who was also an assistant principal and tenured...

No OPRA or Common Law Access Right to Police Body-Worn Camera Video

Fuster v. Township of Chatham, 477 N.J. Super. 477 (App. Div. 2023). This Open Public Records Act ("OPRA") case implicated not only that statute but the Body Worn camera Law...

The End of Last Week

Even as many people were throttling back in anticipation of the long holiday weekend that culminated in Christmas day, the Appellate Division issued three published opinions late last week. Here...

The Final Published Opinion of the Current Term and Noscitur a Sociis

In the Matter of Proposed Construction of Compressor Station (CS327), Office Building and Appurtentant Structures, Highlands Applicability Determination, Program Interest No.: 1615-17-0004.2 (APD200001), 476 N.J. Super. 556 (App. Div. 2023)....

The Appellate Division Declines to Rewrite N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b)

Castano v. Augustine, 475 N.J. Super. 71 (App. Div. 2023). N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b), enacted as part of the reform of New Jersey's automobile insurance system, states: "Any person who is convicted...

The Effect of an Amendment to Prong Two of the "Best Interests of the Child" Test in Termination of Parental Rights Proceedings

New Jersey Division of Child Protection & Permanency v. D.C.A., 474 N.J. Super. 11 (App. Div. 2022). This opinion today by Judge Whipple affirmed the decision of a Family Part...

Supreme Court and Appellate Division Published Decisions This Week

An enjoyable sojourn in Atlantic City for the New Jersey State Bar Association Annual Meeting and Convention delayed this post. I had the privilege of being part of a panel...

A Public Employee's Date of Separation From Employment and the Reasons Therefor Are Not Exempt From Disclosure Under OPRA

Libertarians for Transparent Government v. Cumberland County, ___ N.J. ___ (2022). This is an Open Public Records Act ("OPRA") case. A woman who had been incarcerated at the Cumberland County...

BPU Inaction for 20 Months Results in a Remand for the Agency to Act

In re Verified Petition of Retail Energy Supply Ass'n, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021). This appeal was from the inaction (not any action) by the Board of Public...

The State Must Indemnify as Well as Defend County Prosecutors Offices' Employees

State of New Jersey v. County of Ocean, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021). This opinion by Judge Mawla involved the question of whether the State was obligated to...

1 2 34…Last

The Last Seven Days

The last seven days, an especially busy period for me, featured one Supreme Court opinion and two published Appellate Division decisions. Here are summaries of those rulings:...

No Ethics Violation in Attorney Purchasing Another Attorney's Name as a Keyword for Internet Searches, the Supreme Court Says, With a Caveat

In re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). [Disclosure: I represented an amicus curiae in this appeal]. As Justice Noriega said in his opinion for a 5-1 majority (Justice Pierre-Louis did not participate), this appeal "presents the narrow question of whether it is permissible under the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) for an attorney or law firm to purchase a competing attorney's or law firm's name as a keyword." The Court found it permissible, with a caveat. Justice Fasciale dissented....

Four Criminal Law Cases, and a Qui Tam Appeal, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in five new appeals. One of them is before the Court on leave to appeal, while in the others the Court granted certification....

The "Limited Attorney Exemption" of the Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act is Held Unconstitutional as Violative of the Separation of Powers and Void for Vagueness

Anchor Law Firm, PLLC v. State of New Jersey, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act, N.J.S.A. 17:16G-1 et seq. ("DACCA"), prohibits debt adjusters in New Jersey from operating for a profit. There is an exception for attorneys not "principally engaged" (a term not defined in the statute) in debt adjustment. That exception, adopted in a 1986 amendment, replaced a prior version of the DACCA that had exempted all attorneys from its scope....