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

Two Mayors Lose on Abstention Vote Issue

Booker v. Rice, 431 N.J. Super. 548 (App. Div. 2013), and Zimmer v. Castellano, 432 N.J. Super. 412 (App. Div. 2013). In each of these cases (Booker involving the City of Newark...

Argument Not Raised Below, and Raised on Appeal Only in a Footnote, Would Not be Considered

Oyola v. Liu, 431 N.J. Super. 493 (App. Div. 2013). The main thrust of this opinion by Judge Alvarez was to affirm a decision of the Law Division that granted summary...

The Consumer Fraud Act in Condominium Construction Defect Litigation

Belmont Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Geibel, 432 N.J. Super. 52 (App. Div. 2013). This case resulted in another magnum opus by Judge Parrillo. Plaintiff sued over defective construction of a...

Both General and Special Benefits Must be Considering in Valuing "Just Compensation" for Takings

Borough of Harvey Cedars v. Karan, 214 N.J. 384 (2013). Using the power of eminent domain, the Borough of Harvey Cedars took a portion of defendants' beachfront property (actually, the Borough took...

The Appellate Division Applies the Restatement (Third) of Property- Mortgages

Sovereign Bank v. Gillis, 432 N.J. Super. 36 (App. Div. 2013). This opinion by Judge Sabatino is an example of how a brief introduction can encapsulate an entire, highly detailed opinion. Here...

When "Piecemeal" Adjudication is Required

Waskevich v. Herold Law, P.A., 431 N.J. Super. 293 (App. Div. 2013). What happens in a case where the parties have agreed to arbitrate some claims between them but not others? Do...

Ski Act Does Not Govern Accidents Between Skiers

Angland v. Mountain Creek Resort, Inc., 213 N.J. 99 (2013). Plaintiffs' decedent had a skiing accident with a snowboarder, from which plaintiff's' decedent later died. His estate sued the ski area and the...

District Court Can Raise Statute of Limitations Problem Sua Sponte at Initial Conference

Lassiter v. City of Philadelphia, 716 F.3d 53 (3d Cir. 2013). The initial conference under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 16 is a time for the court to set a proper course...

DeHanes v. Rothman: An Anniversary

On this date in 1999, the Supreme Court decided DeHanes v. Rothman, 158 N.J. 90 (1999). There, in a unanimous opinion by Justice O'Hern, the Court held that it was...

A Jury, Not a Judge, Must Decide Contested Tort Claims Act Issue of Whether a Public Entity Exercised Discretionary Decisionmaking or Undertook a Mere Ministerial Act

Henebema v. South Jersey Transportation Authority, 430 N.J. Super. 485 (App. Div. 2013). The key issue in this case, in which the opinion of the Appellate Division was written by Judge Fasciale, was...

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 45…Last

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....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Where a Party Files a Suit Alleged to Violate the UPEPA But Quickly Dismisses It, Can Defendants Then Get Counsel Fees Under the Statute?

On May 15, judges on Part C of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Satz v. Keshet Starr. Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed a defamation suit against defendants. Defendants filed an o order to show cause to dismiss the case and for attorneys' fees under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-49 et seq. ("UPEPA"). The UPEPA, enacted in 2023, sought to make it more difficult to use the legal system as a weapon to bully individuals into silence by filing what have been known as SLAPP ("strategic lawsuits against public participation") suits....

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....

The Supreme Court Confirms That Municipalities Can be Subjected to Sanctions for Frivolous Litigation

Borough of Englewood Cliffs v. Trautner, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This appeal presented the question of whether municipalities can be liable to pay sanctions for frivolous litigation, under the Frivolous Litigation Statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 ("the FLS"). In a 5-0 opinion written by Justice Fasciale (Chief Justice Rabner and Justice Hoffman did not participate), the Court affirmed, as modified, the decision of the Appellate Division that upheld the Law Division's imposition of FLS sanctions against the Borough....