- IN THE MATTER OF THE REVOCATION OF E.B.'S FIREARMS PURCHASER IDENTIFICATION CARD, ETC. (GPA-016-21, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0820-21 Appellate Aug. 4, 2023
- EBURY RE, LLC VS. TOWNSHIP OF MOUNT OLIVE PLANNING BOARD (L-0464-20, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1630-21 Appellate Aug. 4, 2023
- GABRIELE SPALLACCI, ET AL. VS. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION (NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION) A-2369-20 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- LYNDA THOMSON VS. ATLANTIS CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, ET AL. (L-1488-18, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2561-20 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- ASPEN PROPERTIES GROUP, LLC, ETC. VS. FRANK A. CIAMPI, ET AL. (F-007563-20, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-0635-21 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- EMPOWERNJ, ET AL. VS. DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION (NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION) A-1461-21 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY VS. G.F. (DIVISION OF CHILD PROTECTION AND PERMANENCY) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-3570-21 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- AVICON BROWN VS. OCEAN CASINO RESORT (SC-000245-22, ATLANTIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-4011-21 Appellate Aug. 7, 2023
- NDF1, LLC VS. EDWARD KITCHEN, ET AL. (F-005640-20, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3725-20 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- JASPER FRAZIER VS. NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS) A-0811-21 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. KRISLA REZIREKSYON (12-06-1695, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2407-21 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. MARIO BUITRAGO-SANCHEZ (20-02-0172, HUDSON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-2930-21 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- K.E.Z. VS. J.H. (FV-05-0428-22, CAPE MAY COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-3172-21 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ASHRAF T. HANNA, ETC. (NEW JERSEY STATE BOARD OF PHARMACY) A-3210-21 Appellate Aug. 8, 2023
- E.W. v. W.M-H. FV-07-2446-22 Trial Aug. 4, 2023 Summary FV-07-2446-22 The question presented to the trial court was whether the immunity statute relating to DCPP referrals found at N.J.S.A. 9:6-8.13 confers immunity to DCPP referrals made with the intent to harass a victim of domestic violence as defined under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-17 to -35. There was no prior precedent resolving this issue. In harmonizing the two statutes, the trial court found that it would be contrary to legislative intent to confer immunity in the realm of domestic violence as that would permit the weaponization of DCPP referrals as a means of perpetrating domestic violence. This matter arose out of an application for a final restraining order under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Act. At the conclusion of the trial, the only predicate act surviving was the act of calling DCPP to report allegations of abuse in order to harass the victim. The trial court noted that the Legislature intended to protect children as the primary purpose in enacting the immunity statute regarding DCPP referrals. Additionally, N.J.S.A. 2C:25-18 expressly provides that children can suffer emotionally from the exposure to domestic violence, and that children may also be a victim of domestic violence. Thus, the trial court concluded that the application of the DCPP immunity statute to allegations of harassment under the Prevention of Domestic Violence Acts fails as a matter of law under the doctrine of absurdity. Even though the trial court found that the defendant committed the predicate act of harassment by making reports to DCPP, the trial court ultimately found that the plaintiff failed to satisfy the second prong of Silver v. Silver , 387 N.J. Super. 112 (App. Div. 2006), and denied the application for a final restraining order. Close
- State v. Jason M. O’Donnell (087023) (Hudson County & Statewide) A-17-22 Supreme Aug. 7, 2023 Oral Argument A-17-22 A-17-22 Audio for A-17-22 Close Summary A-17-22 The bribery statute applies to any “person” who accepts an improper benefit -- incumbents, candidates who win, and candidates who lose. N.J.S.A. 2C:27-2. The statute also expressly states that it is no defense to a prosecution if a person “was not qualified to act.” Ibid . So even if a candidate is unable to follow through on a corrupt promise, the language of the bribery statute makes it a crime to accept cash payments for a promise of future performance. The bribery statute’s history, relevant caselaw, and commentary from the Model Penal Code, on which the statute is modeled, confirm that the law extends to candidates. Close
- Amboy Bank v. Bathgate II MON-L-2810-15 Trial March 29, 2023
- DCPP VS. A.G. AND T.S., IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF T.S. (FG-20-0015-21, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) (CONSOLIDATED) A-0968-21/A-1227-21 Appellate Aug. 9, 2023
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. JOSHUA T. NOLAN (21-02-0195, CAPE MAY COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2107-21 Appellate Aug. 9, 2023
- JUSTIN ZIMMERMAN, ACTING COMMISSIONER, ETC. VS. GENEVIEVE STEWARD, ET AL. (NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND INSURANCE) A-2371-21 Appellate Aug. 9, 2023