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

Public Access to Appellate Division Briefs and Oral Arguments is Adjusted

As discussed here, last September the Supreme Court announced that many oral arguments in the Appellate Division would henceforth be livestreamed, as Supreme Court oral arguments have been since 2005. Briefs in many appeals to be argued orally were to be posted online as well....

The Week Just Ending: Three Criminal Law Decisions

This week saw one case decided by the Supreme Court and two published opinions of the Appellate Division. The Supreme Court case, decided by a 6-1 vote, presented an ex post facto issue arising out of amendments to the statute governing parole. The two Appellate Division decisions entailed more "core" criminal law issues. Here are summaries of those cases:...

The 2025 Omnibus Court Rule Amendments and Other Changes

The Supreme Court announced amendments to Court Rules and appendices, as well as certain other procedural changes. That announcement is embodied in an Omnibus Rule Amendment Order that is available here....

"Abuse of Discretion" vs. "Patent and Gross Abuse of Discretion"

State v. Taylor, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6(c), a part of the Graves Act, makes the use or possession of a firearm during the commission, attempted commission, or flight from the commission of certain designated offenses a sentencing factor that triggers the imposition of a mandatory term of imprisonment. A later-added section of the Graves Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:43-6.2, creates an "escape valve," under which a prosecutor may seek from the court a waiver of the imposition of a mandatory minimum sentence where the prosecutor believes that such a sentence would not serve the interest of justice....

A "Swan Song" for a False Light Invasion of Privacy Claim on Statute of Limitations Grounds

Chipola v. Flannery, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). As discussed here, this case was one of two that the Supreme Court agreed to review in its first grants of review of the current Term. The question presented was "Does a claim alleging false light invasion of privacy have a one-year statute of limitations, see Swan v. Boardwalk Regency Corp., 407 N.J. Super. 108 (App. Div 2009)?" Today, agreeing with the Law Division and the Appellate Division, the Supreme Court answered "yes."...