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

December 4- The Anniversary of One of the Most Influential Supreme Court Dissents Ever

On this date in 1950, the Supreme Court decided Fox v. Snow, 6 N.J. 12 (1950). The case dealt with an estate issue. One party urged the Court to "explicitly...

Did Denial of a Trial Adjournment to Allow a Criminal Defendant to Replace a Public Defender With Private Counsel Deprive Defendant of His Constitutional Right to Counsel? The Supreme Court Will Decid

The Supreme Court announced late on Friday that it has granted certification in State v. Maisonet. The question presented on this appeal, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office,...

Mandatory Minimum Prison Term for Driving With a License Suspended After Multiple DWI's is Constitutional

State v. Pimentel, 461 N.J. Super. 468 (App. Div. 2019). N.J.S.A. 2C:40-26 prohibits driving with a license suspended due to a second or subsequent conviction for driving while intoxicated. The...

A "Fund in Court" Anniversary

On this date in 1962, the Supreme Court decided Sarner v. Sarner, 38 N.J. 463 (1962). The Court's unanimous decision there, along with Sunset Beach Amusement Corp. v. Belk, 33...

Two Criminal Cases and a Mortgage Case Reach the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced this afternoon that it has granted certification in three more cases. Two are criminal appeals, and the third involves a mortgage dispute. The mortgage case is...

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...

The Supreme Court Takes Up Goldfarb v. Solimine

Late last week, the Supreme Court granted certification in Goldfarb v. Solimine. The opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 460 N.J. Super. 22 (App. Div. 2019), was discussed here....

A Committee on Character Anniversary

On this date in 1993, the Supreme Court decided In re Peterman, 134 N.J. 201 (1993). [Disclosure: I was a member of the Supreme Court Committee on Character for fifteen...

Tenure Rights Vindicated in the Supreme Court

Miller v. State Operated School District of the City of Newark, ___ N.J. ___ (2019). Today, in a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court affirmed, by a 5-2 vote, the...

Three More Cases for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced this afternoon that it has granted review in three more cases. Each involves a grant of certification. In Gramiccioni v. Department of Law & Public Safety,...

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 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 525354 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....