Much of last week was consumed by a sojourn in Hershey, PA for the Third Circuit Judicial Conference, a very enjoyable and educational experience. As a result, it's time for some catching up. Today's is the first such post....
Tenenbaum v. Allstate Ins. Co., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2026). Judge Natali's opinion for the Appellate Division in this matter today involved two matters that were before the court on leave to appeal. The issue in both cases was whether and when "common law bad faith claims under Pickett v. Lloyd's, 131 N.J. 457, 467 (1993), and those brought under the recently adopted Insurance Fair Conduct Act (IFCA), N.J.S.A. 17:29BB-1 to -3," should be stayed until resolution of all disputes relating to underinsured motorist ("UIM") claims brought in the same action....
While this blog was on hiatus for much of January, the Appellate Division was in high gear, issuing thirteen published opinions. Here are summaries of some of those opinions:...
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....
