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

An "Attagirl" for Judge Chrystal in a Long-Running Mount Laurel Case

Cranford Development Associates v. Cranford Tp., 445 N.J. Super. 220 (App. Div. 2016). This Mount Laurel litigation resulted in a builder's remedy for construction of a 360-unit residential development in...

Monetary Sanction is Imposed on Appellate Counsel for "Utter Indifference to the Standards of Professional Competence"

Sackman v. New Jersey Manufacturers Ins. Co., 445 N.J. Super. 278 (App. Div. 2016). [Disclosure: I represent New Jersey Manufacturers in certain litigation, but not in this case]. This opinion,...

Just Call Him Justice Timpone

With breathtaking speed, Walter Timpone, whom Governor Christie, in a surprise move, nominated to the Supreme Court on April 11, and who cleared the Senate Judiciary Committee last Thursday with...

Timpone Clears the Judiciary Committee by a Unanimous Vote

As expected, the Senate Judiciary Committee today took up Governor Christie's nomination of Walter Timpone to the Supreme Court. Though there was some questioning of the nominee about his decision...

Timpone Nomination May Move Quickly

There is the potential that Governor Christie's nominee to the Supreme Court, Walter Timpone, could appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee as early as tomorrow. Senator Nicholas Scutari (D-Union) said...

Office of Attorney Ethics May Investigate Grievance That District Ethics Committee Had Declined to Docket

Robertelli v. New Jersey Office of Attorney Ethics, 224 N.J. 470 (2016). As today's decision by Chief Justice Rabner describes in exquisite detail, the Supreme Court has established two different...

Open Public Records Act Request That Requires Government to Create Records is Improper

Paff v. Galloway Tp., 444 N.J. Super. 495 (App. Div. 2016). John Paff is a frequent litigant under the Open Public Records Act, N.J.S.A. 47:1A-1 et seq. ("OPRA"). In this...

No Private Nuisance Liability for Natural Conditions

Scannavino v. Walsh, 445 N.J. Super. 162 (App. Div. 2016). Near the start of this opinion, issued today, Judge Leone concisely summarized the whole case and its outcome. "Plaintiff alleges...

The End of a Six-Year Supreme Court Dispute? Governor Christie Nominates Walter Timpone to the Court

The lengthy saga of Governor Christie and the Supreme Court may finally be coming to an end. Without recapping the entire history, in February 2016, Governor Christie nominated Monmouth County...

The Third Circuit Applies Campbell-Ewald and Rejects an Attempt to Moot a Class Action by Buying Off the Named Plaintiff

Weitzner v. Sanofi Pasteur, Inc., 819 F.3d 61 (3d Cir. 2016). Earlier this year, in Campbell-Ewald Co. v. Gomez, 136 S.Ct. 663 (2016), discussed here, the Supreme Court of the...

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 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 888990 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....