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

State Employee Who Chose to Schedule "Furlough Days" Consecutively Cannot Collect Unemployment Compensation for Those Days

Futterman v. Board of Review, 421 N.J. Super. 281 (App. Div. 2011). This case arose out of the 2009 agreement between the Christie administration and the union that represents state...

City/State Location of Calls to/from Public Employees' Government-Provided Cellphones are Not Private

Livecchia v. Borough of Mount Arlington, 421 N.J. Super. 24 (App. Div. 2011). North Jersey Newspapers Co. v. Passaic Cty. Bd. of Freeholders, 127 N.J. 9 (1992), held that "the people...

No Duty to Inspect Delivery Truck for Teenagers Sitting on Back of Truck, Taking a Ride, and Getting Injured by Falling Off

Badalamenti v. Simkiss, 422 N.J. Super. 86 (App. Div. 2011). Advocates of "tort reform" like to complain that New Jersey courts will allow anyone to proceed, or even to recover,...

Dubious Legislation

On June 20, Assemblymen Gary Chiusano (R-24th Dist.) and John Wisniewski (D-19th Dist.) introduced Assembly Bill 4135. That legislation would make appealable to the Appellate Division as of right, instead of on an...

Improper Remarks in Trial Summation Warranted New Trial on Damages Only

Risko v. Thompson Muller Automotive Group, Inc., 206 N.J. 506 (2011). This case came to the Supreme Court because of improper remarks made by plaintiff's counsel in his trial summation....

The Route 280 Case

In re Route 280 Contract, 89 N.J. 1 (1982), is frequently cited in connection with the standards for a grant of certification or a decision to vacate certification. But few have occasion...

Abbott v. Burke XXI (or is it XXII?)- Lots of Appellate Practice Issues

Abbott v. Burke, 206 N.J. 332 (2011). The merits of this latest decision on the funding necessary to satisfy the mandate of article VIII, section 4, paragraph 1 of the New...

Party Does Not Waive Arbitration Clause by Entering Into Mediation

Frumer v. Nat'l Home Ins. Co., 420 N.J. Super. 7 (App. Div. 2011). This short opinion by Judge Simonelli, which involved claims under a new home warranty, reverses a lower court's refusal to...

"Submerged" Forum Selection Clause on Seller's Website is Presumptively Unenforceable

Hoffman v. Supplements Togo Management, LLC, 419 N.J. Super. 596 (App. Div. 2011). In Caspi v. Microsoft Network, LLC, 323 N.J. Super. 118 (App. Div. 1999), the Appellate Division upheld a forum selection...

Appellate Division Keeps Carl Lewis From Getting Out of the Starting Blocks

Layton v. Lewis, 2011 WL 1632039 (App. Div. May 2, 2011). Olympic gold medalist Carl Lewis filed papers to run for the New Jersey State Senate in the Democratic party primary....

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 74 75 76 77 78 798081 82 83…Last

The Supreme Court Clarifies New Jersey's Automobile Exception to the Requirement of a Search Warrant

State v. Fenimore, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Both the United States and New Jersey Constitutions protect the people against "unreasonable searches and seizures" and prohibit the issuance of search warrants without "probable cause." Both federal and New Jersey law, however, recognize an "automobile exception" to the warrant requirement. But New Jersey's automobile exception is narrower than the federal exception, as the Supreme Court stated in State v. Witt, 223 N.J. 409 (2015). Today, the Supreme Court ruled that the Appellate Division in this case had interpreted Witt too broadly in reversing a Law Division decision to exclude evidence from a warrantless search. The Supreme Court reversed and excluded the evidence....

"Liberal Standards" for Standing "Are Not Equivalent to No Standards At All," the Supreme Court Says

New Jersey Coalition of Automotive Retailers, Inc. v. Ford Motor Co., ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As Justice Pierre-Louis observed in her opinion for a unanimous Court in this case today, New Jersey state courts have long "take[n] a more liberal approach to standing than federal law." But in this appeal, the statute sued upon, the Franchise Practices Act, N.J.S.A. 56:10-1 et seq. ("FPA"), stated that only a "franchisee" could sue its franchisor. Because plaintiff here ("NJCAR") was not a franchisee but an association of franchisees, NJCAR lacked standing to bring a FPA case....

Compassionate Release Act Does Not Require Physical Examination of Inmates Seeking Relief, But Denial of Relief in This Case Was Arbitrary and Capricious

M.R. v. New Jersey Department of Corrections, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Plaintiff appealed the denial of his petition for release under the Compassionate Release Act, N.J.S.A. 30:4-123.51 ("CRA"). He argued that he had not been physically examined by a physician, and that the statute required a physical examination. The Appellate Division determined that the statute did not require a physical examination and upheld the denial of compassionate release. Today, in a unanimous opinion by Justice Hoffman, the Supreme Court agreed that no physical examination was required, but reversed the denial of compassionate relief as insupportable....

Prosecutor's Prejudicial Comments During Summation Required Vacation of Conviction on Weapons and Criminal Restraint Charges

State v. Kelly, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). Judge Gummer wrote the panel's opinion in this case. The panel reversed defendant's conviction on weapons and criminal restraint charges, based on a set of facts remarkably similar to those in State v. Daniels, 182 N.J. 80 (2004)....