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

No Personal Jurisdiction Over the Archdiocese in D.T. v. Archdiocese of Philadelphia

D.T. v. Archdocese of Philadelphia, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This unanimous opinion by Justice Patterson involved whether New Jersey courts had personal juriisdiction over the Archdiocese of Philadelphia, a defendant. Suing both the Diocese and Michael J. McCarthy, a priest assigned by the Archdiocese to a Pennsylvania parish, plaintiff alleged that McCarthy had sexually abused him during an overnight trip to a private home in New Jersey. On leave to appeal, as discussed here, the Appellate Division affirmed a ruling of the Law Division that New Jersey courts lacked personal jurisdiction over the Archdiocese on the facts presented. The Supreme Court granted leave to appeal and affirmed in a unanimous opinion by Justice Patterson, who stated that "an n appellate court reviews de novo a trial court's legal determinations regarding personal jurisdiction, but its review of a trial ‘court's factual findings with respect to jurisdiction' is limited to determining whether those findings are supported by substantial, credible evidence in the record."...

Property Cannot be Condemned Solely to Exchange it for Property That Will be Put to a Public Use

Township of Jackson v. Getzel Bee, LLC, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This eminent domain opinion by Judge Berdote Byrne involved two consolidated cases. Plaintiff Township sought to acquire two pieces of property owned by defendants, .Block 21601, Lots 84 and 90. When defendants did not respond, plaintiff commenced condemnation proceedings....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Is the Freedom of Reproductive Choice Act Invalid Due to Alleged Failure of the Legislature to Comply With Procedural Requirements in Enacting the Law?

On Monday, February 3, a panel of judges on Part A will hear oral argument in In re Application of Barbara Eames and William Eames Pursuant to N.J.S.A. 1:7-1 and N.J.S.A. 1:7-4 Seeking to Void L. 2021, c. 375. The cited statutes permit petitioners to seek the original jurisdiction of the Appellate Division....

One From "Column A" (the Supreme Court) and One From "Column B" (the Appellate Division)

In re Estate of Michael D. Jones, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As summarized here, this case involved whether an ex-spouse's rights as the pay-on-death beneficiary on her deceased ex-husband's U.S. savings bonds were superseded by the parties' divorce. The couple's divorce settlement agreement ("DSA") required, as relevant here, that the ex-husband ("Michael") pay the ex-wife ("Jeanine") $200,000 in installments over time. The DSA did not specifically provide for the disposition of savings bonds....

"Written Agreement" Versus "Written Arrangement" Under the Franchise Practices Act

N.A.R., Inc. v. Eastern Outdoor Furnishings A/K/A JC Partners, LLC, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This opinion by Judge Sabatino is an example of a party that "won the battle but lost the war." Defendant/third-party plaintiff Eastern Outdoor Furnishings ("Eastern Outdoor") asserted that third-party defendant AMD Direct, Inc. ("AMD") violated the New Jersey Franchise Practices Act, N.J.S.A. 56:10-1 et seq. ("NJFPA"), in terminating Eastern Outdoor's alleged franchise to sell AMD's products. The Law Division granted summary judgment to AMD, holding that there was no written agreement that established a franchise relationship....

Self- Defense is a Complete Defense to All Types of Homicide

State v. Martinez, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This appeal arose out of an inconsistent verdict by a jury that considered charges of murder, passion/provocation manslaughter, weapons charges, and other crimes not the subject of this published opinion by Judge Jacobs (other counts were addressed in the longer, unpublished version of this opinion). The jury had been charged as follows regarding self-defense:...

A Supreme Court Civil Opinion About Appealability, and an Appellate Division Criminal Decision About a Deported Defendant's Failure to Appear at a Pretrial Conference

Brehme v. Irwin, 259 N.J.505 (2025). One might intuitively think that a plaintiff who accepts full payment of a civil judgment for damages from an auto accident including pain and suffering, disability, impairment, loss of enjoyment of life, and past lost wages, and signs a warrant to satisfy judgment cannot then an appeal a ruling on a motion in limine that barred evidence of future medical expenses....

Court-Appointed Attorney and Temporary Guardian in "Alleged Incapacitated Person" Case Under Rule 4:86 Have No Right to Fees Against Office of Adult Protective Services

In the Matter of A.D., an Alleged Incapacitated Person, ___ N.J. ___ (2024). This case was an appeal from a decision of the Appellate Division, discussed here, that the Office...

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Are New Jersey's "Anti-Fusion" Laws, Which Prevent Minor Parties From Cross-Nominating Candidates Also Nominated by a Major Party, Unconstitutional?

Tomorrow, December 10, judges on Part E will hear oral argument in In re Tom Malinowski, Petition for Nomination for General Election, November 8, 2022, for United States House of...

Judges Vanek and Vinci Are Permanently Assigned to the Appellate Division

Chief Justice Rabner announced that Judges Vinci and Vanek have been permanently assigned to the Appellate Division. They had each been temporarily assigned to that court previously. The Orders making...

1 2 3 456 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…Last

Retired Policeman's Pension Benefits Were Wrongly Paid to His Estranged Spouse Rather Than to His Estate, Where He Had Not Designated Anyone to Receive the Pension Benefit if He Died

Isaac v. Board of Trustees, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Two kinds of benefits are payable to retired members of the.Police and Firemen's Retirement System ("PFRS"). One is a pension benefit, a part of the member's compensation for past services. Pension benefits go to the person whom the member designates, or to the member's estate if no designation is made. The other is a survivor's benefit, which goes to the member's widow for the duration of his or her widowhood. Former Newark policeman Keith Isaac made no designation as to his pension benefits, though he did list his estranged wife, Roxanne, as his spouse when he filed for retirement. Based on that, Isaac's pension benefits were distributed to Roxanne. Isaac's estate contested that, and today the Supreme Court held that the estate should have gotten the pension monies....

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....