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

Plaintiffs Win Against Towing Companies in the Supreme Court, Except on Their TCCWNA Claims

Pisack v. B&C Towing, Inc., 240 N.J. 360 (2020). This matter involved multiple consolidated consumer class actions challenging the fees charged by the defendant towing companies, which towed plaintiffs' vehicles...

Internet Transactions and Personal Jurisdiction

Jardim v. Overley, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). This opinion yesterday, by Judge Sabatino, applied a venerable doctrine in a new context. As Judge Sabatino put it, the...

Appellate Division Roundup

The Appellate Division does not issue many opinions in August, as the judges clean up remaining inventory. But there have been some significant published opinions in the last two weeks....

Still Fighting Over Dugan v. TGI Friday's

Cameron v. South Jersey Pubs, Inc., 460 N.J. Super. 156 (App. Div. 2019). As discussed here, in Dugan v. TGI Friday's, Inc., 231 N.J. 24 (2017), the Supreme Court rendered...

22 Years Since Lemelledo v. Beneficial Management

On July 3, 1997, the Supreme Court decided Lemelledo v. Beneficial Management Corp. of America, 150 N.J. 255 (1997). Justice Handler's opinion in that case, for a 6-0 Court, is...

Administrative agency actions Justice Faustino Fernandez-Vina

Certain Underwriters at Lloyds Subscribing to Policy PLH-0013397 v. Public Service Electric and Gas, 459 N.J. Super. 436 (App. Div. 2019). Judge Fisher's opinion in this appeal today was barely...

Three New Appeals Take Three Different Routes to the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in three more cases. Each one came to the Court in a different way. In the first case, S.T. v. 1515...

Faxes That Are Not "Advertisements" Do Not Violate The Telephone Consumer Protection Act Even if Sent for a Commercial Purpose or Motivated by Profit

Mauthe, M.D., P.C. v. Optum Inc., 925 F.3d 129 (3d Cir. 2019). Plaintiff, a medical practice, received an unsolicited fax from defendants. Defendants maintain a database of healthcare providers, a...

An Unusual U.S. Supreme Court Lineup Rules Against Class Action Third-Party Counterclaim Defendants on a Removal Issue

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, 139 S. Ct. 1743 (2019). Among other changes made by the so-called Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. 1453(b) ("CAFA") made it...

Judge Nugent Reminds Us That Rule 4:23-5's Requirements Must be "Scrupulously Followed and Technically Complied With"

Salazar v. MKGC + Design, 458 N.J. Super. 551 (App. Div. 2019). In Thabo v. Z Transp., 452 N.J. Super. 359 (App. Div. 2017), discussed here, the Appellate Division made...

1 2 3 456 7 8 9 10 11 12 13…Last

"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....

The "Castle Doctrine"

State v. Bragg, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). A jury found defendant guilty of twelve charged counts, including attempted murder, kidnapping, aggravated assault, terroristic threats, possession of a weapon for an unlawful purpose, endangering, and two lesser-included offenses of harassment. Some of those charges involved the use of deadly force. Persons may not use deadly force if the can retreat with complete safety. But under the "castle doctrine," an exception to the general rule, a person "is not obliged to retreat from his dwelling, unless he was the initial aggressor." N.J.S.A. 2C:3-4(b)(2)(b)(i). That doctrine derives from the common law....

No Arbitrariness in Rejection of Public Construction Bid That Failed to Include a Properly Signed, Required Consent of Surety

In the Matter of Protest Filed by El Sol Contracting and Construction Corp., Contract T100.638, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). This public bidding case resulted in a 5-2 split at the Supreme Court, the first non-unanimous ruling of the current Term. Justice Hoffman wrote the majority opinion, while Justice Fasciale authored the dissent for himself and Justice Pierre-Louis....