NJ Appellate Law Blog

LDGA's Appellate Practice Group Wins Tier 1 Recognition in Best Lawyers in America®

Best Lawyers in America® has listed my firm's Appellate Practice group in Tier 1 of Best Lawyers' New Jersey rankings. As the leader of that practice, I congratulate all the members of the Appellate Practice group on this recognition. I'm also very proud of my colleagues in the other practice groups that received Tier recognition in Best Lawyers....

The Sixteenth Anniversary of New Jersey Appellate Law Blog

Yesterday marked the sixteenth anniversary of this blog. It has been a great year, with more readers, more subscribers, and the placement of posts on LinkedIn for the first time, so that readers have an additional place to find this blog's posts. And the blog reached the milestone of 2,500 posts. As always, my thanks go to the many jurists, attorneys, law faculty and students, and "just plain citizens" who are interested enough in New Jersey appellate law developments to take the time to read this blog. On to year 17!...

Back Soon

Due to certain circumstances and obligations, there have been no posts on this blog for a number of weeks. But have no fear. Posts will resume soon....

Editorial- The 2024 Presidential Election

[Disclosure/disclaimer: As with all posts labeled "Editorial," this post reflects the views only of its author. The views expressed do not purport to represent those of Lite DePalma Greenberg &...

The Fourteenth Anniversary of New Jersey Appellate Blog

Last Friday, October 18, while I was out of action, marked fourteen years since the start of this blog on October 18, 2010. Much has changed since then, over 2,300...

Three Basic Appellate Principles From a Recent Unpublished Opinion

At this time of the year, published decisions from the Supreme Court and the Appellate Division are few and far between, as the new Term is barely one month old....

Appellate Division Oral Arguments of the Week: Three Attorneys' Fee Appeals

This week's oral argument of the week comprises appeals involving awards of attorneys' fees in three different cases. In two of the cases, appellants argue that fee awards should be...

Early August Break

There will be no posts on this blog in the first part of August. Posts will resume thereafter....

Operator of Low-Speed Electric Scooter is Not a "Pedestrian" Entitled to Personal Injury Protection Under the No-Fault Act

Goyco v. Progressive Ins. Co., 257 N.J. 313 (2024). Plaintiff was hit by a car while he was operating a low-speed electric scooter ("LSES"), a Segway Ninebot KickScooter Max. As...

Another Overbreadth Decision by the Supreme Court

State v. Higginbotham, 257 N.J. 260 (2024). Earlier this week, as discussed here, the Supreme Court unanimously invalidated a portion of a regulation due to its overbreadth, which violated the...

12 3 4…Last

Appeals About Land Use, Statutory Interpretation, Validity of a Warrantless Dumpster Search, and the Speech and Debate Clause for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in four new appeals. In two of those matters, the Court granted leave to appeal. The other two cases are before the Court on grants of certification....

October in the Appellate Division

After issuing only one published opinion in the Term that began on September 1 (a well-reasoned opinion by Judge Rose in Carbone v. Bd. of Trustees, ___ N.J. Super. __, 2026 N.J. Super. LEXIS 79 (App. Div. Sept. 11, 2026)), the Appellate Division issued four published rulings in the final third of October. Here are summaries:...

LDGA's Appellate Practice Group Wins Tier 1 Recognition in Best Lawyers in America®

The First Supreme Court Decision of the Current Term: A Challenging One

Association for Government Responsibility, Ethics and Transparency v. Borough of Mantoloking, ___ N.J. ___ (2026). The issue in this Open Public Records Act ("OPRA") case, which also implicated the common law right of access, was whether the identity of the sender of an email is subject to disclosure under either body of law. By a 5-2 vote, the Court said the sender's identity was a government record subject to OPRA and not protected by the work product doctrine. But the Court held that disclosure was not required, as the sender's reasonable expectation of privacy outweighed the interest in disclosure....