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

Where Jail Inmates Had Been Told That Their Telephone Calls Would be Monitored and Recorded, They Had No Reasonable Expectation of Privacy in Those Calls

State v. Jackson, 241 N.J. 547 (2020). In a per curiam opinion, the Supreme Court today affirmed the ruling of the Appellate Division in this case (actually, two consolidated cases),...

An Expungement Case and a "Conditional Res Ipsa Loquitur" Case for the Supreme Court

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in two more cases. One arises out of a finding of child abuse and neglect. The other involves a request for...

Forfeiture of Entire Public Pension Due to Guilty Plea of Accepting $300 Bribe is Not an Unconstitutional "Excessive Fine"

State v. Anderson, 463 N.J. Super. 168 (App. Div. 2020). Defendant, formerly employed by the Jersey City Tax Assessor's office, pled guilty to a federal criminal charge of interference with...

This Week's Appellate Division Arguments Will be Conducted Telephonically

As stated here, all Appellate Division oral arguments through March 27 will be conducted telephonically rather than in person. There is no indication yet as to whether that will continue...

The Supreme Court Takes Up a Miranda Case

The Supreme Court announced that it has granted certification in State v. Ahmad, an appeal from a manslaughter conviction. The question presented there, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk's...

Third-Party Defendant Not Sued Directly by Plaintiff Must Still Participate at Trial Absent a Valid Defense to the Third-Party Claim

Mejia v. Quest Diagnostics, Inc., 241 N.J. 360 (2020). Today's opinion by Justice Fernandez-Vina, for a unanimous Supreme Court, involved "whether a third-party defendant, facing only claims for contribution and...

Appellate Oral Arguments in the Time of Coronavirus

As announced here, the Supreme Court of the United States today advised that, "in light of public health concerns," it is postponing oral arguments that had been scheduled for March...

Sanctions, Damages for a Removed "Bamboo Fence," and a 4-3 Supreme Court Vote

Kornbleuth v. Westover, 241 N.J. 289 (2020). The Supreme Court of the United States frequently seems to split 5-4. It is relatively rare for the Supreme court of New Jersey...

The Compassionate Use Medical Marijuana Act and the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination

Wild v. Carriage Funeral Holdings, Inc., 241 N.J. 285 (2020). In this case, as discussed here, the Appellate Division reversed a trial level decision that had granted dismissal of plaintiff's...

Breaking the Silence

February 26 was the most recent post on this blog. From then until today, I have had an Appellate Division oral argument, an oral argument on a dispositive motion in...

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 363738 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100…Last

Sentencing Counsel's Limited Investigation of Defendant's Citizenship Was Not Constitutionally Ineffective in the Circumstances

State v. Hernandez-Peralta, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). Justice Wainer Apter's decision today for a 5-2 Supreme Court majority began by phrasing the issue presented. "In this appeal, we consider whether sentencing counsel was constitutionally ineffective for failing to investigate defendant's citizenship status beyond asking him if he was a United States citizen and receiving an unequivocal ‘yes,' and therefore not advising him that his plea could make him subject to deportation." The majority found, based on the particular facts, that counsel was not constitutionally ineffective, reversing the two lower courts. Justice Noriega, joined by Justice Fasciale, dissented....

The 2025-26 General Assignment Order

Chief Justice Rabner announced the 2025-26 General Assignment Order. It is available here....

New Jersey's Charity Care Program for Hospitals is Not a Per Se Unconstitutional Taking of Property

Englewood Hospital & Medical Center v. State, ___ N.J. ___ (2025). New Jersey has had a charity care program, in one form or another, for 178 years. As Justice Fasciale summarized the current charity care program in his opinion for a unanimous Supreme Court, under the current program "hospitals cannot turn away a patient for inability to pay, N.J.S.A. 26:2H-18.64, and patients who qualify for charity care shall not be billed for services rendered, N.J.A.C. 10:52-11.4. Instead, ‘disproportionate share hospitals' (DSHs), or hospitals that serve a disproportionate number of low-income patients, see N.J.S.A. 26:2H-18.52, receive annual subsidies from the Health Care Subsidy Fund (HCSF) in exchange for providing charity care, see N.J.S.A. 26:2H-18.52, .58, .58d."...

A Municipal Court Administrator is Employed by the Township, Not the Administrative Office of the Courts

Palmisano v. State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2025). The opening paragraph of Judge Marczyk's opinion for the Appellate Division well encapsulates what the appeal was about and what the result was. "Plaintiff Lindsay Palmisano appeals from the trial court's April 1, 2024 order dismissing her complaint with prejudice against defendant State of New Jersey Administrative Office of the Courts and Municipal Division (AOC) pursuant to Rule 4:6-2(e). The primary issue on appeal is whether plaintiff, a municipal court administrator, is an employee of the AOC, thereby allowing her to assert a claim against the AOC under the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination (LAD), N.J.S.A. 10:5-1 to -49. Based on our review of the record and the applicable legal principles, we conclude plaintiff was employed by Vernon Township (Township), not the AOC, and, therefore, we affirm."...