Sorry, you need to enable JavaScript to visit this website.

Search

  • ARTHUR E. BALSAMO, ESQ., VS. CAJE QESJA (L-0502-23, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2558-22 Appellate Aug. 30, 2024
  • NJ CRIMINAL INTERDICTION LLC VS. KEVIN WALSH, ETC. (L-0996-22, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3065-22 Appellate Aug. 30, 2024
  • STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JASON FRENCH (22-02-0233, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-0228-23 Appellate Aug. 30, 2024
  • In the Matter of the Estate of Quy Dinh Vuong a/k/a Peter Quy Dinh Vuong Deceased MON-P-459-19 Trial Aug. 28, 2024
  • CHRISTIAN GONZALES VS. WILFREDO MEJIA-MENDOZA, ET AL. (L-0737-20, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1143-22 Appellate Sept. 3, 2024
  • IN RE ROUTE 27, DRIVEWAY MODIFICATION APPEAL, ETC. (NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION) A-1580-22 Appellate Sept. 3, 2024
  • PETER AND NITA ROSE, ETC. VS. SHORE CUSTOM HOMES CORP., ET AL. (L-1428-22, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3995-22 Appellate Sept. 3, 2024
  • IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF ALLAN D. YORKOWITZ, DECEASED (265728, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2835-22 Appellate Sept. 4, 2024
  • FINANCE OF AMERICA REVERSE, LLC VS. KENNETH BROWN, ET AL. (F-000866-15, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2974-22 Appellate Sept. 4, 2024
  • J.M. VS. S.M. AND J.R.H. (FD-09-1335-22, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-1205-23 Appellate Sept. 4, 2024
  • MICHAEL HANUS, ET AL. VS. AUDI OF AMERICA, INC. (L-3057-22, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2343-23 Appellate Sept. 4, 2024
  • STATE IN THE INTEREST OF M.P. (FJ-12-0333-22, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0134-22 Appellate Sept. 4, 2024 Summary A-0134-22 In this appeal, the court is asked to reconsider our decision in State in the Interest of K.B. , 304 N.J. Super. 628 (App. Div. 1997), where the court held that juveniles adjudicated delinquent who seek nondisclosure of their name must demonstrate harm specific to their individual circumstances.  Juvenile M.P. contends due to the public disclosure of his juvenile delinquency adjudication and name over the Internet, he suffers far greater harm than the juvenile in K.B. faced some twenty-seven years ago, when online news reporting was nascent.  He contends he "demonstrate[d] a substantial likelihood that specific and extraordinary harm would result from such disclosure," the standard under N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-60(f) to bar disclosure.  Given that K.B. was based upon our interpretation of N.J.S.A. 2A:4A-60(f), a statute which still governs the disclosure of a juvenile delinquency adjudication and has not been amended to reflect the Internet's impact, the court affirms the trial court's order because M.P. failed to show how disclosure of his name would violate the statute. Close
  • Spencer Savings Bank, S.L.A. v. Seidman, et al. BER-C-129-22 Trial Aug. 30, 2024
  • DCPP VS. J.V. AND A.A., IN THE MATTER OF W.A. (FN-16-0057-21, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-3215-21 Appellate Sept. 5, 2024
  • IN THE MATTER OF FAWN MCGEE, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION) A-1334-22 Appellate Sept. 5, 2024
  • STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. TINA LUNNEY (10-01-0190, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1713-22 Appellate Sept. 5, 2024
  • DCPP VS. C.R.A.G. AND R.G., IN THE MATTER OF J.G., J.G., AND J.G. (FN-07-0152-21, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2521-21/A-0391-22 Appellate Sept. 6, 2024 Summary A-2521-21/A-0391-22 Following a joint trial, the family court found that defendants R.G. and C.R.A.G., husband and wife, abused or neglected two-year-old M.R., who was unrelated to them but under their care, causing him actual harm.  The family court in turn determined defendants' actions or inactions against M.R. resulted in the abuse or neglect of their children by "creating [im]minent danger or a substantial risk of being impaired due to their failure to exercise a minimum degree of care."  Defendants' back-to-back appeals raising several issues are consolidated in this one opinion.  They contend the family court lacked jurisdiction over them because they were not M.R.'s legal caretakers under N.J.S.A. 9:6-2 and N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21, and M.R. was not named as a subject child in the complaint.  Assuming the family court had jurisdiction, they contend there was insufficient evidence to support a prima facie case of abuse or neglect of M.R.  Moreover, despite that finding, they contend there was insufficient evidence to support the court's determination that their conduct towards M.R. placed their children at risk of imminent harm.  C.R.A.G. separately argues the record demonstrates she appropriately cared for M.R.  She also contends the Division of Child Protection & Permanency (DCPP) failed to present a sufficient cause of action for abuse and neglect of her children.  Relatedly, she contends that the family court improperly relied on her treatment of M.R. to support its findings on behalf of her biological children, as it constituted inadmissible other crimes evidence. The Law Guardian cross-appeals, joining R.G.'s contention that he was not M.R.'s guardian under N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.21(a).  The Law Guardian argues the family court engaged in impermissible burden shifting by concluding defendants actually harmed M.R.  The Law Guardian also argues there was insufficient evidence to support the court's finding that R.G. abused or neglected his children.  After reviewing the record and applicable law, the court reverses and remands.  As to R.G., the court concludes the family court did not have jurisdiction over him because there was insufficient evidence that he was M.R.'s guardian under Title 9.  As to C.R.A.G., the court concludes the family court had jurisdiction over her because there was sufficient evidence that she was M.R.'s guardian under Title 9, but there was insufficient evidence that she caused M.R. actual harm and/or placed her children at risk of imminent harm.  The court therefore remands to the family court to remove defendants' names from DCPP's child abuse registry maintained under N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.11.     Close
  • JOHN M. MAVROUDIS VS. VEDDER PRICE P.C., ET AL. (L-7714-19, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2568-21 Appellate Sept. 6, 2024
  • JEREMY BARATTA VS. CITY OF PERTH AMBOY (L-6116-20, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3560-21 Appellate Sept. 6, 2024
  • NICOLETTE PIPPIS VS. PDC 16-20 HUDSON PLACE REALTY, LLC, ET AL. (L-0350-20, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3685-21 Appellate Sept. 6, 2024