NJ Appellate Law Blog

The First Opinion by Justice Solomon

State v. Jaffe, 220 N.J. 114 (2014). As discussed here, the first opinion written by a new Justice is generally a unanimous decision in a relatively unexceptional case. Today, Justice Solomon, a...

"Brown" Wins a Tax Penalty Appeal in the Supreme Court

United Parcel Service Gen. Servs. Co. v. Director, Div. of Taxation, 220 N.J. 90 (2014). This per curiam decision of the Supreme Court today affirmed an Appellate Division decision, written by Judge...

Immunity for Actions of Hospital Internal Review Committees

Hurwitz v. AHS Hospital Corp., 438 N.J. Super. 269 (App. Div. 2014). The Healthcare Quality Improvement Act of 1986 ("HCQIA"), 42 U.S.C. §§11111-11112, creates an immunity from damages claims arising...

No Sufficient Findings Below, So No Appellate Ruling on Constitutional Challenge to Advance Voter Registration Statute

Rutgers University Student Assembly v. Middlesex Cty. Bd. of Elections, 438 N.J. Super. 93 (App. Div. 2014). Plaintiffs challenged the constitutionality of N.J.S.A. 19:31-6.3b, which, as Judge Haas described it...

Collateral Estoppel, Law of the Case, and Some Evidence Issues

L.T. v. F.M., 438 N.J. Super. 76 (App. Div. 2014). This case began with plaintiff obtaining a final restraining order ("FRO") against defendant in the Family Part because defendant had...

A "Tail" Insurance Tale

Mortgage Grader, Inc. v. Ward & Olivo, LLP, 438 N.J. Super. 202 (App. Div. 2014). In the legal malpractice context, a "tail" insurance policy is one that "provides insurance coverage for malpractice...

More on Charter Schools

Education Law Center v. New Jersey State Bd. of Educ., 438 N.J. Super. 108 (App. Div. 2014). In In re Grant of Charters to Merit Preparatory School and Newark Preparatory...

Public Utilities Are Not Exempt From Municipal Regulation

New Jersey Natural Gas Co. v. Borough of Red Bank, 438 N.J. Super. 164 (App. Div. 2014). New Jersey Natural Gas ("NJNG") proposed to remove underground gas regulators located in...

What if They Passed a Statute and Neither Side Complied With It?

Manhattan Trailer Park Homeowners Ass'n, Inc. v. Manhattan Trailer Court & Trailer Sales, Inc., 438 N.J. Super. 185 (App. Div. 2014). The Mobile Home Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 46:8C-2 to -21,...

Jim Thorpe's Remains, or, When Congressional Intent Trumps Plain Statutory Language

Thorpe v. Borough of Jim Thorpe, 770 F.3d 255 (3d Cir. 2014). Jim Thorpe was one of the greatest athletes of the twentieth century. He won Olympic medals in 1912...

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 60 616263 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84…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....