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

The Supreme Court Adds to Its Criminal Docket (Plus a Tort Case)

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in four more cases. Three of those are criminal appeals. The fourth is a tort case relating to a residential...

A Class Action About Towing Charges, and a Mesothelioma Case About Apportionment, Will be Before the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted leave to appeal in one case and certification in another. Both cases doubtless will be closely watched. The Court granted leave to...

The Litigation Privilege Applies to Statements, Not to Omissions in Notices of Intent to Foreclose

Wright v. Bank of America, N.A., 456 N.J. Super. 328 (App. Div. 2018). This short opinion by Judge Fisher reversed a decision of the Law Division that dismissed plaintiff's Complaint...

Big Pharma Wins in Another Supreme Court Accutane Decision

In re Accutane Litigation, 235 N.J. 229 (2018). [Disclosure: I argued this appeal, together with co-counsel, on behalf of the plaintiffs. The opinions expressed in this post are mine alone,...

Another Consumer Arbitration Clause Case, and a Criminal Appeal, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has granted certification in two new cases. The first is yet another matter involving whether and when consumer disputes can be forced into arbitration. That case (actually,...

The First Two Supreme Court Grants of Review of the New Term

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two cases. These are the first grants (Nos. A-1 and A-2) of the current Term. The first appeal is Garden...

"Deemed Adopted" Administrative Law Judge Disciplinary Decision Gets the Same Deference on Appeal as Agency's Imposition of Discipline or Trial Court's Sentencing Decision

In re Hendrickson, 235 N.J. 145 (2018). This first Supreme Court opinion of the current Term is by Justice Albin. The opening paragraphs of his ruling concisely and completely describe...

House Judiciary Committee Votes for Live Streaming of U.S. Supreme Court and Circuit Court of Appeals Oral Arguments

The House Judiciary Committee, by a voice vote, advanced the Judiciary Reforms, Organizational and Modernization Act of 2018, known as "the Judiciary ROOM Act." The bill number is H.R. 6755....

"Wants" vs. "Needs" and the Fair Housing Amendments Act

Vorchheimer v. The Philadelphian Owners Association, 903 F.3d 100 (3d Cir. 2018). Today's opinion by Judge Bibas focuses on what is "necessary" for purposes of the Fair Housing Amendments Act,...

SLUSA Does Not Bar Investors' Claims That Broker Overcharged Them to Execute Securities Transactions

Taksir v. The Vanguard Group, 903 F.3d 95 (3d Cir. 2018). As relevant to this appeal, the Securities Litigation Uniform Standards Act of 1998, 15 U.S.C. §78bb ("SLUSA"), states that...

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 61 62 636465 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....