Town of Kearny v. Brandt, 214 N.J. 76 (2013). Deciding when the ten-year construction statute of repose, N.J.S.A. 2A:14-1.1, begins to run is often a difficult issue for courts. In this case,...

Paff v. New Jersey State Firemen's Ass'n, 431 N.J. Super. 278 (App. Div. 2013). John Paff is a frequent litigant under the Open Public Records Act, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq. ("OPRA"). He...

Waskevich v. Herold Law, P.A., 431 N.J. Super. 293 (App. Div. 2013). What happens in a case where the parties have agreed to arbitrate some claims between them but not others? Do...

This blog previously posed the question "Is Mandatory Judicial Retirement at 70 Unconstitutional?" That was because some Pennsylvania judges had challenged that state's requirement that judges retire at age 70,...

E.B. v. Division of Medical Assistance & Health Services, 431 N.J. Super. 183 (App. Div. 2013). This appeal challenged the issuance of Medicaid Communication No. 11-03 by the defendant Division. In that...

Koseoglu v. Wry, 431 N.J. Super. 140 (App. Div. 2013). This opinion by Judge Lihotz was issued in April but was approved for publication only today. It is a medical malpractice case,...

City Clerk Did Not Comply With Faulkner Act, But That Did Not Constitute a Violation of the New Jersey Civil Rights Act

Tumpson v. Farina, 431 N.J. Super. 164 (App. Div. 2013). This case arose under the Faulkner Act, N.J.S.A. 40:69A-1 to -210. [Disclosure: My firm, Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC, represented defendants in this...

Vellucci v. Allstate Ins. Co., 431 N.J. Super. 39 (App. Div. 2013). Plaintiff's decedent was employed by Allstate at an office building owned, designed, built, and managed by Mack-Cali Realty, L.P. Plaintiff...

In re Estate of Thomas, 431 N.J. Super. 22 (App. Div. 2013). Rule 4:85-1 establishes a short time period (four months for New Jersey residents and six months for non-residents, subject to...

Hernandez v. North Jersey Neurosurgical Assocs., 2013 N.J. Super. LEXIS 1146 (App. Div. May 14, 2013). This decision, in a medical malpractice case, was designated as not precedential, but perhaps should be reconsidered...