Blogs

Blogs

New Jersey Appellate Law Blog

Search our blog posts

Mar 26, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


The Supreme Court Affirms in the State v. Harrell Confrontation Clause Case

State v. Harrell, ___ N.J. ___ (2024). As discussed here, this case presented the following question for the Supreme Court: “Under the circumstances presented, is the alleged victim’s recorded statement from when she was eight years old admissible at trial now when she is fifteen and would testify that she recalls only one of the…

View Post »

Mar 25, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


“Illusory Discounts” Violate the Consumer Fraud Act, But Private Plaintiffs Cannot Prevail

Robey v. SPARC Group, LLC, ___ N.J. ___ (2024). Today saw a relatively rare 4-3 decision from the Supreme Court. The majority consisted of Justice Solomon, the author of the majority opinion, Chief Justice Rabner, and Justices Patterson and Pierre-Louis. Justice Fasciale authored the dissent, in which Justices Wainer Apter and Noriega joined. The case,…

View Post »

Mar 25, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


The Supreme Court Takes Up Two Published Appellate Division Decisions

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two new cases. Both cases were the subject of published opinions in the Appellate Division. In 257-261 20th Avenue Realty, LLC v. Roberto, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office, is “Is the Tax Sale Law, which authorizes the purchaser of…

View Post »

Mar 21, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


Alcoholism As a Disability Under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination: An Anniversary

On this date in 1988, the Supreme Court decided Clowes v. Terminix Int’l, Inc., 109 N.J 575 (1988). The Court’s unanimous opinion, written by Justice Clifford, stated that “[t]he principal issue posed by this appeal is whether alcoholism is to be deemed a handicap under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -42”…

View Post »

Mar 18, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


The Entire Controversy Continues to Have Potency

Francavilla v. Absolute Resolutions VI, LLC, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2024). Judge Vanek wrote this opinion for the Appellate Division in this putative class action case. Her first sentence describes the essence of the matter: “This appeal requires us to determine whether a putative class action complaint seeking to claw back funds paid…

View Post »

Mar 14, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


The New Jersey Law Against Discrimination and Emotional Support Animals in Condominiums

Players Place II Condominium Ass’n, Inc. v. K.P., ___ N.J. ___ (2024). This case came to the Supreme Court as of right, due to a dissent in the Appellate Division, as discussed here. In a 6-0 opinion by Chief Justice Rabner (Justice Wainer Apter did not participate), the Court reversed the Appellate Division and laid…

View Post »

Mar 12, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


“Compact” Ward Boundaries Under the Municipal Ward Law

Jersey City United Against the New Ward Map v. Jersey City Ward Commission, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2024).…

View Post »

Mar 11, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


Two New Criminal Cases for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted review in two new cases. Both are criminal matters. The first new matter actually comprises two appeals, State v. Nieves and State v. Cifelli. The Supreme Court granted certification and leave to appeal. The question presented in those appeals, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office,…

View Post »

Mar 8, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


When is a Warrantless Automobile Search “Unforeseeable and Spontaneous”?

State v. Baker, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2024). This opinion by Judge Currier, in a drug possession case, involved once again the automobile exception to the warrant requirement for a search. To summarize the facts, the police initially stopped defendants’ vehicle based on a reasonable suspicion of a motor vehicle violation because the…

View Post »

Mar 5, 2024 by Bruce D. Greenberg


“The Unique Facts of This Case” Lead the Supreme Court to Hold That the Defense Was Properly Required to Produce a Certain Affidavit in Reciprocal Discovery

State v. Knight, ___ N.J. ___ (2024). In this opinion by Justice Pierre-Louis today, a unanimous Supreme Court twice stated that the facts of this case were “unique.” That is likely correct, as the summary of those facts by Justice Pierre-Louis shows: “Defendant Isaiah J. Knight was charged with murder. A witness to the murder…

View Post »
+ More Blog Posts