Law v. Siegel, ___ U.S. ___ (2014). Outrageous behavior of a litigant deserves to be punished. That is why provisions such as Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 11 and a comparable bankruptcy rule, Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 9011, among ...
Feliciano v. Faldetta, 434 N.J. Super. 543 (App. Div. 2014). Rule 4:58-1 allows a plaintiff to make an offer of judgment. If the defendant does not accept the offer, and the plaintiff then tries the case and achieves an award ...
The 2014 Report of the Supreme Court Civil Practice Committee has been issued. The Committee has recommended changes to certain appellate rules. Other changes proposed to the Committee were not recommended. The Supreme Court has invited written comments on the report. Any ...
R.K. v. D.L., Jr., 434 N.J. Super. 113 (App. Div. 2014). At least since Printing Mart v. Sharp Electronics, 116 N.J. 739 (1989), it has been clear that motions to dismiss for failure to state a claim, Rule 4:6-2(e), are ...
Caporusso v. New Jersey Dep’t of Health & Senior Services, 434 N.J. Super. 88 (App. Div. 2014). The prerogative writ of mandamus is the centerpiece of this opinion by Judge Lihotz. Plaintiffs, on behalf of a putative class, sued the ...
Midland Funding, LLC v. Albern, 433 N.J. Super. 494 (App. Div. 2013). “[I]s a defendant, who, in responding to a complaint, moved for dismissal but did not file an answer after the motion was denied, entitled to notice of a ...
In re Proposed Quest Academy Charter School, 216 N.J. 370 (2013). In this unanimous opinion, fittingly written by Justice LaVecchia given her Office of Administrative Law background, the Supreme Court addressed the question of what standard of review applies to ...
Appeals About Issues Decided by State Agency Must Go to the Appellate Division, Not the Law Division
Beaver v. Magellan Health Services, Inc.. 433 N.J. Super. 430 (App. Div. 2013). “Under what circumstances may a litigant pursue common law and statutory causes of action in the Law Division, rather than appeal from State final agency determination, where ...
Effective December 1, 2013, amendments to several Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure (“FRAP”) became effective. There are changes, all of which relate to appeals from the United States Tax Court, to FRAP 13, 14, and 24. There are also revisions ...
Eastman v. First Data Corp., 736 F.3d 675 (3d Cir. 2013). Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23(f) permits the losing party on a motion to certify a class, whether plaintiff or defendant, to petition for review of the district court’s ...