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

The Appellate Division Denies a Stay Pending Appeal in DePascale

On November 18, an Appellate Division panel consisting of Judges Carchman, Fisher and Nugent denied the State's motion for a stay pending the appeal, now before the Supreme Court on...

Direct Certification of Cases by the Supreme Court, Bypassing the Appellate Division

The Supreme Court's grant last Thursday of direct certification of the judges' pension case, DePascale v. New Jersey, has generated some controversy. Governor Christie, for example, criticized the Court for preempting Appellate Division review....

Supreme Court Grants Direct Certification in DePascale v. New Jersey (Judges' Pension Contribution Case)

Today, the Supreme Court issued an order granting direct certification in DePascale v. New Jersey. The question presented, as summarized by the Supreme Court Clerk's Office, is "as applied to certain justices and judges,...

The Perils of Being a Pro Se Appellant

Barna v. Maldonado, 2011 WL 5244968 (App. Div. Nov. 4, 2011). The two appellants, who were plaintiffs in this case, appeared pro se. In the Law Division, they had won a jury...

Today is the First Anniversary of This New Jersey Appellate Law Blog

One year ago today, this blog began its existence with its very first post. There have been approximately 225 posts since, covering all aspects of New Jersey appellate law and practice, with...

The Rule of Necessity

Judge Feinberg's decision yesterday finding unconstitutional a law that purported to increase the amount that sitting Superior Court judges and Supreme Court Justices must pay toward their pensions and health care has already...

38 Years Since Fablok Mills

New Jersey caselaw under the Uniform Commercial Code is relatively undeveloped compared to New York's decisional law. On this date in 1973, however, the Appellate Division issued one of New...

Judge Shwartz Nominated to the Third Circuit

President Obama has nominated Magistrate Judge Patty Shwartz to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals. She would fill the "New Jersey seat" that was created when Judge Barry took senior...

Carl Lewis Comes From Behind

The saga of Carl Lewis' attempt to run for the State Senate has taken a new turn. Yesterday, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals reversed a decision of the district...

Calculating the Available Discovery Period

Jatczyszyn v. Marcal Paper Mills, Inc., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2011). The key issue in this case involves how to calculate the discovery period permitted by the Court Rules in a circumstance where...

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 37 38 394041 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)....