Procopio v. Gov’t Employees Ins. Co., 433 N.J. Super. 377 (App. Div. 2013). As Judge Parrillo stated in today’s opinion, rulings of trial level judges on discovery matters, and on whether to sever some claims from others, are both discretion calls. In ...
Redd v. Bowman, 433 N.J. Super. 178 (App. Div. 2013). This is another case that involves the power of citizens of a municipality established under the Faulkner Act, N.J.S.A. 40:69A-1 to -210, to propose municipal ordinances by initiative, N.J.S.A. 40:69A-184, or approve or ...
In re Estate of DeFrank, 433 N.J. Super. 258 (App. Div. 2013). This case involved the question of whether the funds in certain joint bank accounts, which accounts were in the names of decedent and defendant, passed to defendant or ...
Advance at Branchburg, II, LLC v. Branchburg Tp. Bd. of Adj., 433 N.J. Super. 247 (App. Div. 2013). The normal, strict standards for a use variance, as expressed in Medici v. BPR Co., 107 N.J. 1 (1987), are relaxed where ...
Delaware Coalition for Open Government, Inc. v. Strine, 733 F.3d 510 (3d Cir. 2013). It is rare that judges, and a court, are defendants in a lawsuit. It is even more rare that they are the losers in such an ...
Hedden v. Kean University, 434 N.J. Super. 1 (App. Div. 2013). This interlocutory appeal, which resulted in a 2-1 decision by the Appellate Division, involved issues of attorney-client privilege. In an opinion by Judge Parrillo, joined by Judge Harris, the majority reversed ...
Today, the Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion, written by Chief Justice Rabner, denying the State’s request to stay the Law Division’s ruling that allows same sex marriages in New Jersey. The Supreme Court’s opinion is available here. That opinion largely ...
Soliman v. The Kushner Companies, Inc., 433 N.J. Super. 153 (App. Div. 2013). Defendants secretly installed hidden surveillance cameras in bathrooms in an office building that they operated. The stated reason for doing that was that there had been “complaints of ...
D’Agostino v. Maldonado, 216 N.J. 168 (2013). The requirement of the Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-19 (“CFA”), that a consumer sustain an “ascertainable loss” as a prerequisite to recovery has long been one of the most elusive concepts in CFA ...
Allstate New Jersey Ins. Co. v. Lajara, 433 N.J. Super. 20 (App. Div. 2013). Plaintiff insurers sued a number of defendants under the Insurance Fraud Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 17:33A-1 to -30 (“the Act”). Plaintiffs asserted that they had paid out ...