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

Two Opinions in Two Days by Justice Solomon

In re Atlantic County, 230 N.J. 237 (2017); In re New Jersey Firemens Association Obligation to Provide Relief Application Under Open Public Records Act, 230 N.J. 258 (2017). On Wednesday...

Residential Mortgage Foreclosure Mediation Program is Meant to Produce Enforceable Settlements, and the Supreme Court Enforces Such a Settlement

GMAC Mortgage, LLC v. Willoughby, 230 N.J. 172 (2017). In 2008, recognizing the effects of the financial crisis on New Jersey homeowners, our Supreme Court established the Residential Mortgage Foreclosure...

The Appellate Division Addresses the Noerr-Pennington Doctrine

Main Street at Woolwich, LLC v. Ammons Supermarket, Inc., 415 N.J. Super. 135 (App. Div. 2017). The Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which originated in two cases from the Supreme Court of the...

Defendant Who Fails to Timely Serve Notice of Tort Claim Cannot Sue Public Entity for Contribution or Common Law Indemnification

Jones v. Morey's Pier, Inc., 230 N.J. 142 (2017). Under the New Jersey Tort Claims Act, N.J.S.A. 59:8-8, a tort plaintiff who fails to timely serve a notice of tort...

Accutane Plaintiffs Overcome the "Super-Presumption" That FDA-Approved Warnings About Drugs are Adequate

In re Accutane Litig., 2017 WL 3138003 (App. Div. July 25, 2017). [Disclosure: I argued for the successful plaintiffs in one of these two consolidated appeals, the one that involved...

Appellate Court's View That Merits of a Case Are Weak Does Not Justify Abandoning Deferential Standard of Review of Trial Level Discovery Rulings

Capital Health System, Inc. v. Horizon Healthcare Services, Inc., 230 N.J. 73 (2017). These two consolidated cases involved rulings on discovery disputes, a subject that rarely reaches the Supreme Court....

Ex Post Facto Constitutional Issues, Workers Compensation Jurisdiction, and Municipal Land Use Are Added to the Supreme Court's Docket

The Supreme Court has granted certification to review three more appeals. The first of those actually consists of four cases that have been consolidated under the lead case, State v....

Piercing the Corporate Veil: An Anniversary

July 21, 1983 saw two very important opinions from the Supreme Court. One of them, Application of Matthews, 94 N.J. 59 (1983), was the first major opinion regarding a Committee...

A Big OPRA Opinion From Chief Justice Rabner

North Jersey Media Group, Inc. v. Lyndhurst Tp., 229 N.J. 541 (2017). Due to the amount of administrative duties that attend the office of Chief Justice of the Supreme Court...

Spokeo Again Fails Defendants at the Third Circuit

Susinno v. Work Out World, Inc., 862 F.3d 346 (3d Cir. 2017). Spokeo, Inc. v. Robins, 136 S.Ct. 1540 (2016), discussed here, was a case in which class action defendants...

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 73 747576 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....