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

Which Appellate Deadlines Are Jurisdictional?

Hamer v. Neighborhood Housing Services of Chicago, 138 S.Ct. 13 (2017). In Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007), the Supreme Court of the United States explained that an appeal...

The Third Circuit Grants Mandamus, and Announces a New Test for Transfer in Unusual Circumstances

In re Howmedica Osteonics Corp., 867 F.3d 390 (3d Cir. 2017). Today's opinion by Judge Krause contains a little bit of a lot of things: in no particular order, waiver,...

Standing, Attorneys' Fees, Disability, and Search and Seizure: The Latest Cases for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court has granted review in four more cases. In Cherokee LCP Land, LLC v. City of Linden Planning Bd., the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court...

Terms of Use Not to Disclosed to Consumers, on a Website That They Never Visited, Do Not Require Them to Take Grievances to Arbitration

James v. Global Tellink Corp., 852 F.3d 262 (3d Cir. 2017). In this putative class action, plaintiffs were inmates at New Jersey correctional facilities. They signed up with defendants for...

Sovereign Immunity Defeats Contribution Claims Against the State for Pre-Spill Act Discharges

NL Industries, Inc. v. State, 228 N.J. 280 (2017). In 1976, the Legislature passed the New Jersey Spill Compensation and Control Act, N.J.S.A. 58:10-23.11 to -23.24 ("the Spill Act"). The...

The Requirement to Submit All Items From Below on Summary Judgment Appeals Applies Whether Summary Judgment Was Granted or Denied

Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc., 449 N.J. Super. 193 (App. Div. 2017). On February 6, 2017, the Appellate Division issued a published opinion in this case, which was discussed...

Jury Waiver and Fee Award to Defendant in CEPA Case Are Overturned

Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc., 448 N.J. Super. 486 (App. Div. 2017). In Abbamont v. Piscataway Tp. Bd. of Educ., 238 N.J. Super. 603 (App. Div. 1990), aff'd, 138...

Sovereign Immunity Prevails, But the State Police Still Lose

Royster v. New Jersey State Police, 227 N.J. 482 (2017). Today's decision is a unique one. Writing for the majority of five Justices (Justices LaVecchia, Patterson, Fernandez-Vina, Solomon, and Timpone),...

No Waiver of Arbitration Clause Even After Years of Litigation, Because Arbitration Demand, Pre-AT&T v. Concepcion, Would Have Been Futile

Chassen v. Fidelity Nat'l Financial, Inc., 836 F.3d 291 (3d Cir. 2016). [Disclosure: I was an expert witness for plaintiffs in this case, but my Declaration and deposition testimony was...

Due Process Requires Counsel for an Indigent Parent in a Private Adoption Case That Would Terminate Parental Rights

In re Adoption of a Child by J.E.V. and D.G.V., 226 N.J. 90 (2016). In this unanimous opinion, authored by Chief Justice Rabner, the Supreme Court ruled that an indigent...

1 2 3 4 5 678 9 10 11…Last

Four New Criminal Appeals, and a Lone Civil Matter, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in five new appeals. Four of them are criminal cases and one is a civil appeal....

The "Limited Attorney Exemption" of the Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act is Held Unconstitutional as Violative of the Separation of Powers and Void for Vagueness

Anchor Law Firm, PLLC v. State of New Jersey, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The Debt Adjustment and Credit Counseling Act, N.J.S.A. 17:16G-1 et seq. ("DACCA"), prohibits debt adjusters in New Jersey from operating for a profit. There is an exception for attorneys not "principally engaged" (a term not defined in the statute) in debt adjustment. That exception, adopted in a 1986 amendment, replaced a prior version of the DACCA that had exempted all attorneys from its scope....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Where a Party Files a Suit Alleged to Violate the UPEPA But Quickly Dismisses It, Can Defendants Then Get Counsel Fees Under the Statute?

On May 15, judges on Part C of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Satz v. Keshet Starr. Plaintiff, acting pro se, filed a defamation suit against defendants. Defendants filed an o order to show cause to dismiss the case and for attorneys' fees under the Uniform Public Expression Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-49 et seq. ("UPEPA"). The UPEPA, enacted in 2023, sought to make it more difficult to use the legal system as a weapon to bully individuals into silence by filing what have been known as SLAPP ("strategic lawsuits against public participation") suits....

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....