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

Entire Controversy Doctrine Does Not Bar Second Case Brought by Party Who, as a Defendant, Defeated a Prior Case for Failure to State a Claim

Bank Leumi USA v. Kloss, 243 N.J. 218 (2020). As discussed here, this was a case involving a certified question from the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, and for the...

Straight to the Supreme Court for the New Jersey Republican State Committee's Constitutional Challenge to the New Jersey COVID-19 Emergency Bond Act

On July 16, the New Jersey Republican State Committee and other plaintiffs filed suit against Governor Murphy in the Law Division, Mercer County. The lawsuit asserts that the New Jersey...

Two More for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in two new cases. In one case, the Court granted certification. In the other, there was a dissent in the...

New Jersey Arbitration Act Applies Automatically to Contracts Exempt From Federal Arbitration Act

Arafa v. Health Express Corp., 243 N.J. 147 (2020). Justice Fernandez-Vina's opinion today actually involved two consolidated cases, both of which were putative class actions. The issue was whether a...

Qualified Immunity Denied Based on Dispute About Material Facts

Baskin v. Martinez, 243 N.J. 112 (2020). This Civil Rights Act case involved what Justice Albin, writing for the four-Justice majority, labeled a claim that "a justifiable police chase ended...

The Supreme Court Takes Up "An Unresolved Issue" Under the No Early Release Act

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in State v. Njango. The question presented there, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office, is "Where a person was...

No Fair Market Value Credit for Foreclosure Debtors Unless Creditors Pursue a Deficiency Action

West Pleasant-CPGT, Inc. v. U.S. Home Corp., 243 N.J. 92 (2020). [Disclosure: I represented the successful defendant in this appeal]. This unanimous decision by Justice LaVecchia today addressed an equitable...

Theodore Botter (1924-2020)

Theodore Botter, an Appellate Division judge who was best known for a landmark decision that he issued as a trial judge, died on June 22, according to an obituary published...

Several Statutes and Common Law Permit an Assignee of a Mortgage Note That Was Lost by the Assignor to Enforce the Note

Investors Bank v. Torres, 243 N.J. 25 (2020). As discussed here, the Appellate Division, in an opinion reported at 457 N.J. Super. 53 (App. Div. 2018), affirmed a summary judgment...

As June Ends, Three Opinions From the Supreme Court

Unlike the Supreme Court of the United States, which customarily (though apparently not this year) issues all its opinions for the term by June 30, the Supreme Court of New...

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 39 40 41 42 43 44 454647 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 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146…Last

A Municipal Court Administrator is Employed by the Township, Not the Administrative Office of the Courts

Palmisano v. State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The opening paragraph of Judge Marczyk's opinion for the Appellate Division well encapsulates what the appeal was about and what the result was. "Plaintiff Lindsay Palmisano appeals from the trial court's April 1, 2024 order dismissing her complaint with prejudice against defendant State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts and Municipal Division (AOC) pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(e). The primary issue on appeal is whether plaintiff, a municipal court administrator, is an employee of the AOC, thereby allowing her to assert a claim against the AOC under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49. Based on our review of the record and the applicable legal principles, we conclude plaintiff was employed by Vernon Township (Township), not the AOC, and, therefore, we affirm."...

Supreme Court to Take Up Two Published Appellate Division Opinions

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in two new appeals. One is before the Court on leave to appeal. The Court granted certification in the other matter....

South Seaside Park Can Detach Itself From Berkeley Township

Whiteman v. Township Council of Berkeley Township, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). South Seaside Park is a small (490 year-round residents) barrier island community that has been annexed to the Township of Berkeley ("the Township"). South Seaside Park sought to deannex itself from the Township and to be annexed instead to the Borough of Seaside Park. South Seaside Park followed a statutory petitioning procedure in doing so. The Township refused consent. South Seaside Park went to court and won a ruling from the Law Division that rejected the Township's refusal. The Appellate Division affirmed. Yesterday, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Patterson, the Supreme Court affirmed as well....

Megan's Law "Not Likely to Pose a Threat to the Safety of Others" Extends to Non-Sexual as Well as Sexual Re-Offenses

In re Registrant S.O., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This appeal presented a pure legal issue relating to the "public safety prongs" contained in the termination provisions of Megan's Law, N.J.S.A. 2C:7-2(f), and the Community Supervision for Life statute ("CSL"), N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.4(c). Judge Vanek crystallized that "novel" issue as "whether, on a registrant's application to terminate Megan's Law and CSL obligations, the phrase ‘not likely to pose a threat to the safety of others' should be broadly interpreted with the trial court considering threats to safety from subsequent non-sexual and sexual offenses or whether the inquiry should be limited to the threat of sexual re-offense only." The panel held that the broader view was the correct one....