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

More About Notice Under the Municipal Land Use Law

Northgate Condominium Ass'n, Inc. v. Hillsdale Planning Bd., 214 N.J. 120 (2013). Opponents of land use development applications sometimes contest the adequacy of the notice given by development applicants, as occurred in...

The Appellate Division Enforces a Settlement Agreement Between Attorney Litigants

Wolf v. Galex, 2013 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1053 (App. Div. May 6, 2013). [Dislosure: I am co-counsel for Mr. Wolf in this matter, and I argued this appeal before the Appellate...

The Passive Voice (and Persuasive Legislative History) Makes the Difference in Statutory Interpretation

Cologna v. Board of Trustees, Police & Firemen's Retirement Syst., 430 N.J. Super. 362 (App. Div. 2013). By statute, a former member of the Police and Firemen's Retirement System ("PFRS") normally has two...

Election Laws Have Flexibility

Regalado v. Curling, 430 N.J. Super. 342 (App. Div. 2013). The lesson of this short opinion by Judge Sapp-Peterson, issued the day after this appeal was orally argued due to the need...

Trial Judge Erred in Limiting Medical Malpractice Plaintiff to One Expert Only

McLean v. Liberty Health System, 430 N.J. Super. 156 (App. Div. 2013). This opinion by Judge Ashrafi addresses a number of evidence issues. The most important, however, relates to the decision of...

A Jury, Not a Judge, Must Decide Contested Tort Claims Act Issue of Whether a Public Entity Exercised Discretionary Decisionmaking or Undertook a Mere Ministerial Act

Henebema v. South Jersey Transportation Authority, 430 N.J. Super. 485 (App. Div. 2013). The key issue in this case, in which the opinion of the Appellate Division was written by Judge Fasciale, was...

A Very Important Ruling About Late Notices of Tort Claim

D.D. v. University of Medicine & Dentistry of New Jersey, 213 N.J. 130 (2013). Under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:8-1 et seq. ("TCA"), no lawsuit can be filed against...

Hypothetical Questions to an Expert Witness

Townsend v. Pierre, 429 N.J. Super. 522 (App. Div. 2013). Though this case, which arose out of an auto accident, is a decision on summary judgment, it may be of greatest interest to...

No Magic Words Needed for Insurer to Reject Under-Insured Motorist Arbitration Award and Obtain a Trial

Vega v. 21st Century Ins. Co., 430 N.J. Super. 18 (App. Div. 2013). More and more, courts are rejecting formalisms and looking to the realities of a situation. This opinion by Judge...

If Your Client Switches Attorneys, It'll be Hard to Sue the New Lawyer for Tortious Interference

Nostrame v. Santiago, 213 N.J. 109 (2013). When a personal injury plaintiff in a potentially big case switches attorneys, the attorney being replaced may see a potentially large fee disappearing. It is...

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 63 64 65 66 67 68 697071 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82…Last

The Last Seven Days

The last seven days, an especially busy period for me, featured one Supreme Court opinion and two published Appellate Division decisions. Here are summaries of those rulings:...

No Ethics Violation in Attorney Purchasing Another Attorney's Name as a Keyword for Internet Searches, the Supreme Court Says, With a Caveat

In re Opinion No. 735 of the Supreme Court Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). [Disclosure: I represented an amicus curiae in this appeal]. As Justice Noriega said in his opinion for a 5-1 majority (Justice Pierre-Louis did not participate), this appeal "presents the narrow question of whether it is permissible under the Rules of Professional Conduct (RPC) for an attorney or law firm to purchase a competing attorney's or law firm's name as a keyword." The Court found it permissible, with a caveat. Justice Fasciale dissented....

Four Criminal Law Cases, and a Qui Tam Appeal, for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced today that it has granted review in five new appeals. One of them is before the Court on leave to appeal, while in the others the Court granted certification....

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....