The end of last week saw the issuance of one Supreme Court ruling and two published Appellate Division decisions. Two of those were in criminal appeals. The third involved the exclusion of an expert witness in a medical malpractice case....

The week of Thanksgiving and the week preceding it saw one Supreme Court opinion and four published rulings from the Appellate Division. Catching up, here are summaries....

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....

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in four new cases. Two of them are criminal matters. The other two involve eminent domain issues. One of the criminal appeals is before the Court on leave to appeal, the second grant of leave to appeal in the current Term. The Court granted certification in the other three matters....

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....

When this blog began, in October 2010, it covered goings-on in the Supreme Court of New Jersey, the Appellate Division, and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, with occasional posts about the Supreme Court of the United States. That continued for many years. More recently, however, it became too difficult to keep up with all of those three courts, and coverage of the Third Circuit disappeared virtually entirely. But since the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division have not published many decisions recently (a circumstance that is certain to change shortly), this blog will resume covering the Third Circuit at least on occasion, beginning today....

State v. Amang, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). This opinion, issued today, was another magnum opus (63 pages) by Judge Susswein in a criminal case. As stated in the first sentence of the decision, this was an appeal from defendant's "jury trial convictions for aggravated assault, simple assault, endangering the welfare of a child, possession of an assault firearm, and possession of large capacity ammunition magazines. Defendant committed the assault and endangering crimes against his daughters." The bottom line result was an affirmance of the convictions for most of the crimes, but a reversal and remand on the simple assault charges....

The Supreme Court announced this afternoon that it has granted leave to appeal in two matters. The first of those cases is State v. Miles. The question presented in that appeal, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's office, is "Was defendant entitled to discovery related to the State's use of facial recognition technology, see State v. Arteaga, 476 N.J. Super. 36 (App. Div. 2023)? Relying on Arteaga, where the Appellate Division had approved such discovery, a two-judge panel of the Appellate Division, in an unpublished order, affirmed the Law Division's similar ruling here....

Voynick v. Voynick, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The start of Judge Bergman's opinion in this case today offered a good summary of the issues in this Family Part appeal. "In this appeal, we address the legal standards to be applied by a reviewing court concerning applications for termination or modification of permanent alimony under N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23(j)(3) based on the retirement of an obligor when the judgment or order establishing the alimony obligation was entered prior to the 2014 amendment of N.J.S.A. 2A:34-23."...

. Focazio, M.D. v. Arthur St. Realty, LLC, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). As Judge Vinci stated in his opinion for the Appellate Division in this case, "[i]t has long been the rule in New Jersey that a tort claim cannot be assigned prior to judgment." This case, which alleged legal malpractice, centered on agreements that plaintiff entered into with the opposing party in the lawsuit that underlay the malpractice action ("Tsairis") and with his attorneys in that lawsuit....