NJ Appellate Law Blog

"Appearance of Impropriety" Standard Continues to Apply to Quasi-Judicial Municipal Bodies

Kane Properties, LLC v. City of Hoboken, 214 N.J. 199 (2013). This opinion by Justice Hoens affirms, as modified, the decision of the Appellate Division in this municipal land use matter, reported at...

Use Variance Applicant Need Not Show That Subject Property is the Only Available Site for the Use

Price v. Himeji, LLC, 214 N.J. 263 (2013). Himeji, LLC applied to the Union City Board of Adjustment for a use variance, density, height, and other variances, and a waiver necessary for the construction of a...

Supreme Court Will Review Merchantville v. Malik

The Supreme Court announced this morning that it has granted review in Borough of Merchantville v. Malik & Son, LLC, 429 N.J. Super. 116 (App. Div. 2013). The decision of the...

Two Issues Under the Construction Statute of Repose

Town of Kearny v. Brandt, 214 N.J. 76 (2013). Deciding when the ten-year construction statute of repose, N.J.S.A. 2A:14-1.1, begins to run is often a difficult issue for courts. In this case,...

Supreme Court Denies Review of Senatorial Election Dispute

This afternoon, the Supreme Court issued an Order denying plaintiffs' petition for certification in this election matter. As the Order notes, that disposition moots plaintiffs' request for emergent relief. The special...

Supreme Court Schedules Briefing on Senatorial Election Challenge

The Supreme Court has issued a schedule for briefing on the emergent appeal by parties challenging Governor Christie's scheduling of special elections to fill the United States Senate seat held by Senator Lautenberg...

Ski Act Does Not Govern Accidents Between Skiers

Angland v. Mountain Creek Resort, Inc., 213 N.J. 99 (2013). Plaintiffs' decedent had a skiing accident with a snowboarder, from which plaintiff's' decedent later died. His estate sued the ski area and the...

Estate of Desir v. Vertus Reversed: Defendant Owed No Duty of Care

Estate of Desir v. Vertus, 214 N.J. 303 (2013). In this case, which involved the application of premises liability and the rescue doctrine to a tragic shooting death, the Appellate Division reversed the Law...

The Rollout of Electronic Filing in the Appellate Division

The Supreme Court has issued a Notice to the Bar, available here, that reveals the schedule for the introduction of electronic filing in the Appellate Division. Criminal appeals and motions...

The Invited Error Doctrine

State v. A.R., 185 N.J. 256 (2013). This blog does not often report on criminal cases. But the attached decision, written by Judge Cuff for a unanimous Supreme Court, highlights the invited...

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 79 80 818283 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102…Last

The Second and Third Published Appellate Division Decisions of the Current Term

As September turned to October, the Appellate Division issued its second and third published opinions of the Term. One was a decision by Judge Vinci in a civil appeal. The other ruling, in a criminal appeal, was authored by Judge Perez Friscia....

Appellate Division Oral Argument of the Week: Did it Violate a Class Action Settlement That Barred Mass Opt-Outs to Allow Opt-Outs From a Marketing Campaign That Solicited Opt-outs?

On Tuesday, September 30, judges on Part G of the Appellate Division will hear oral argument in Esposito v. Cellco Partnership d/b/a Verizon Wireless. The case follows from a $100 million nationwide class action settlement that had required class members who decided to exclude themselves from the settlement and potentially pursue their own litigation against Verizon to opt out individually, and barred mass opt-outs. However, Murphy Advocates, LLC, a Colorado law firm conducted a marketing campaign to create a mass opt-out that attracted about 11,000 class members who responded to Murphy that they wished to opt out....

A Pair of New Criminal Appeals for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two new cases. Both are criminal appeals. One is from a published opinion of the Appellate Division, while the other is from an unpublished per curiam decision by a three-judge panel....

Can a Plaintiff in a Civil Case Refuse to Testify at Trial After Being Served With a Defense Notice in Lieu of Subpoena and Having Been Ordered to Testify by the Trial Judge? An Anniversary

On this date in 2005, the Supreme Court decided Gonzalez v. Safe & Sound Sec. Corp., 185 N.J. 100 (2005). The case involved a plaintiff who was shot in an apartment building in Atlantic City, which left him paralyzed. He brought a negligence suit against a number of defendants, including Atlantic City Housing & Urban Renewal Associates ("ACHURA"), the owner of the apartment building....