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

Two More Accelerated Criminal Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced two new grants of review. Both are criminal cases, and the Court accelerated the proceedings in both appeals. Each of them will be set down for...

In a Construction Defect Case, the Supreme Court Again Clarifies Statute of Limitations Law

The Palisades at Fort Lee Condominium Association, Inc. v. 100 Old Palisade, LLC, 230 N.J. 427 (2017). This opinion, by Justice Albin for a unanimous Court, involved a lengthy construction...

Volunteer Fireman is Not an "Employee" of His Volunteer Fire Company for Purposes of CEPA

Sauter v. Colts Neck Volunteer Fire Co. No. 2, 451 N.J. Super. 581 (App. Div. 2017). The Conscientious Employee Protection Act, N.J.S.A. 34:19-1 to -14 ("CEPA") protects "employees who report...

The New Term's First Grant of Supreme Court Review

Kicking off its new term, the Supreme Court announced its first grant of review last Friday. The Court granted leave to appeal in State v. Dickerson, another case under the...

Three More Cases to be Reviewed by the Supreme Court

Today, the Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in three cases. All three cases involve grants of certification, and one of them also is an appeal as of...

Judge Espinosa Returns to the Appellate Division (Temporarily)

The Supreme Court announced today that Judge Espinosa has been temporarily assigned to Part E of the Appellate Division from September 1 through September 30, 2017. That Order amends the...

Municipal Planning and Zoning Boards Lack Power Over State University Development Proposals

Montclair State University v. County of Passaic, 451 N.J. Super. 523 (App. Div. 2017). The Municipal Land Use Law, N.J.S.A. 40:55D-1 et seq., places responsibility for development applications within a...

Pharmaceutical Patent Antitrust Class Action Complaints Stated Plausible Claims for Relief, so the Third Circuit Reverses the Dismissal of Those Cases

In re Lipitor Antitrust Litig., 868 F.3d 231 (3d Cir. 2017). It is evident that an appeal is a big one when, as here, the caption and counsel list consume...

Plaintiff is Over the Moon, as the Third Circuit Applies New Jersey's Arbitration Cases to Defeat Defendant's Demand for Arbitration

Moon v. Breathless, Inc., 868 F.3d 209 (3d Cir. 2017). At least since 2014, when the Supreme Court of New Jersey decided Atalese v. U.S. Legal Servs. Grp., L.P., 219...

The Supreme Court Abandons Baures v. Lewis in Family Law Child Relocation Cases

Bisbing v. Bisbing, 230 N.J. 309 (2017). Justice Patterson began her opinion in this case, for a unanimous Court, as follows. "This appeal arises from a trial court's post-judgment determination...

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 69 70 71 72 737475 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....