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

"Hot Fun in the Summertime": Appellate Division Summer Parts

In an Order available here, Chief Justice Rabner announced the lineup for the Appellate Division's summer Parts. As has been customary, the "summer" runs not between the meteorological start and end dates for summer, nor from Memorial Day to Labor Day, but from June 16 through September 7....

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....

Using Proof of Habit or Routine Practice as Evidence of Conduct in a Particular Instance

Fazio v. Altice USA, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As Justice Fasciale noted in his opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court today, "[h]abit evidence is particularly well suited for cases involving reasonably regular and uniform routine practices of business organizations." New Jersey Evidence Rule 406 permits proof of conduct in a particular instance via the presentation of habit or routine practice. The application of that Rule was at the center of this appeal....

Two Published Appellate Division Decisions in This Short Week

Tomorrow is Independence Day and the courts are closed. Many have taken vacation time in this short week. But not the Appellate Division, which issued two published opinions this week. Here are summaries....

The Supreme Court Takes Up a Paramedics Immunity Case

The Supreme Court announced late yesterday that it has granted certification in Almonte v. Township of Union. The question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office, is "Under the circumstances presented, are the paramedics entitled to immunity because they provided advanced life support services "in accordance with this act" as required by N.J.S.A. 26:2K-14, specifically, N.J.S.A. 26:2K-10(a), which requires that the paramedic "maintains direct voice communication with and is taking orders from a licensed physician or physician directed registered professional nurse"?...