NJ Appellate Law Blog

Supreme Court Will Review A Megan's Law Case and Another Criminal Matter

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review (one on a motion for leave to appeal and one on a petition for certification) in two more criminal cases. In...

Three More Cases for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that three more cases have been added to its docket. State v. Carrero, Jr. is before the Court by virtue of a dissent in the Appellate...

Catching Up With Supreme Court Grants of Review

I've missed a lot of days in the last several weeks. The Supreme Court, however, has been active. The Court announced grants of review in the following cases: In Lee...

Judge Sabatino's Ruling That Choice of Law Decisions Can be Made Defendant-by-Defendant is Affirmed by the Supreme Court

Ginsberg v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 227 N.J. 7 (2016). Last year, the Appellate Division, speaking through Judge Sabatino, issued a lengthy opinion in this choice of law case. That decision,...

1 N.J. 1 (1948)

Have you ever wondered about the very first opinion ever to appear in New Jersey Reports? If not (and it's certainly more than understandable if you have not expended time...

Three New Grants of Certification

The Supreme Court has announced that it has granted review in three new cases. The cases are an interesting assortment. In State v. Burkett, a criminal case, the question presented,...

A Judson Anniversary

As discussed here, many veteran lawyers know of Judson v. Peoples Bank & Trust Co. of Westfield, 17 N.J. 67 (1957), as the predecessor to Brill v. Guardian Life Ins....

Remittitur Decisions Cannot Take Account of Awards in Other Cases

Cuevas v. Wentworth Group, 226 N.J. 480 (2016). In He v. Miller, 207 N.J. 230 (2011), the Supreme Court addressed issues of remittitur at length and in detail. Among other...

The Supreme Court Will Review a Family Law Case and a Search Warrant Case

The Supreme Court has announced that it has granted review in two cases. The first matter, Bisbing v. Bisbing, arises out of the Family Part. The Appellate Divsiion's decision, reported...

Municipal Ban on Digital Billboards is Unconstitutional

E&J Equities v. Franklin Tp. Bd. of Adj. , 226 N.J. 549 (2016). Billboards are not everyone's favorite thing. Many view them as a blot on the landscape (and not...

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 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 606162 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…Last

The Second and Third Published Appellate Division Decisions of the Current Term

As September turned to October, the Appellate Division issued its second and third published opinions of the Term. One was a decision by Judge Vinci in a civil appeal. The other ruling, in a criminal appeal, was authored by Judge Perez Friscia....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Did it Violate a Class Action Settlement That Barred Mass Opt-Outs to Allow Opt-Outs From a Marketing Campaign That Solicited Opt-outs?

On Tuesday, September 30, judges on Part G of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Esposito v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless. The case follows from a $100 million nationwide class action settlement that had required class members who decided to exclude themselves from the settlement and potentially pursue their own litigation against Verizon to opt out individually, and barred mass opt-outs. However, Murphy Advocates, LLC, a Colorado law firm conducted a marketing campaign to create a mass opt-out that attracted about 11,000 class members who responded to Murphy that they wished to opt out....

A Pair of New Criminal Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two new cases. Both are criminal appeals. One is from a published opinion of the Appellate Division, while the other is from an unpublished per curiam decision by a three-judge panel....

Can a Plaintiff in a Civil Case Refuse to Testify at Trial After Being Served With a Defense Notice in Lieu of Subpoena and Having Been Ordered to Testify by the Trial Judge? An Anniversary

On this date in 2005, the Supreme Court decided Gonzalez v. Safe & Sound Sec. Corp., 185 N.J. 100 (2005). The case involved a plaintiff who was shot in an apartment building in Atlantic City, which left him paralyzed. He brought a negligence suit against a number of defendants, including Atlantic City Housing & Urban Renewal Associates ("ACHURA"), the owner of the apartment building....