- REBEKAH SAMUEL VS. THEODORE CALABRESE (FM-07-2528-16, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2231-21 Appellate Aug. 14, 2023
- DONALD A. RICHARDSON, JR. VS. T.D. BANK DELRAN NJ (L-2601-21, BURLINGTON COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3458-21 Appellate Aug. 14, 2023
- PAUL MARINACCIO VS. ROMAN HERNIAK, ET AL. (L-1452-21, MORRIS COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1334-21 Appellate Aug. 15, 2023
- DR. CHRISTOPHER BINETTI, PHD VS. STATE OF NEW JERSEY, ET AL. (C-000120-20, MERCER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1802-21 Appellate Aug. 15, 2023
- DOVAN MANAGEMENT GROUP LLC VS. AMGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY (DC-008902-21, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2729-21 Appellate Aug. 15, 2023
- FEDERAL NATIONAL MORTGAGE ASSOCIATION VS. CIRILO ALVAREZ, ET AL. (F-031065-15, PASSAIC COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3311-21 Appellate Aug. 15, 2023
- Victoria Crisitello v. St. Theresa School 085213) (Union County & Statewide) A-63-20 Supreme Aug. 14, 2023 Oral Argument A-63-20 A-63-20 Audio for A-63-20 Close Summary A-63-20 The “religious tenets” exception of N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(a) -- “it shall not be an unlawful employment practice” for a religious entity to follow the tenets of its faith “in establishing and utilizing criteria for employment” -- is an affirmative defense available to a religious entity when confronted with a claim of employment discrimination. Here, it is uncontroverted that St. Theresa’s followed the religious tenets of the Catholic Church in terminating Crisitello. St. Theresa’s was therefore entitled to summary judgment and the dismissal of the complaint with prejudice. Close
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. C.G.H. (22-08-1576, OCEAN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2065-22 Appellate Nov. 13, 2023
- JOEL T. CHICANTEK VS. ARIANNE MUNOZ FV-09-2455-21 Trial Nov. 9, 2023
- IN THE MATTER OF THE APPEAL OF THE DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR FIREARMS PURCHASER IDENTIFICATION CARD AND PERMITS TO PURCHARE A HANDGUN N.M. (GPA-012-20, MONMOUTH COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2445-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS ISRAEL HIRALDO (19-02-0102, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2599-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- MALCOM A. ISLER VS. THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CAMDEN, ET AL. (L-3547-19, CAMDEN COUNYTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2641-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL D. JONES (P-000005-20, CAMDEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2944-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023 Summary A-2944-21 In this probate dispute, the court considered whether application of N.J.S.A. 3B:3-14 conflicts with federal regulations governing ownership of United States Savings Bonds to warrant preemption by virtue of the Supremacy Clause, Article VI, Clause 2, of the United States Constitution. Under N.J.S.A. 3B:3-14, divorce automatically revokes a disposition of property in a governing instrument made by a divorced individual to his or her former spouse before the divorce. Defendant ex-wife filed a claim against her ex-husband's estate seeking payment of outstanding obligations under the parties' divorce settlement agreement (DSA) when her ex-husband died intestate prior to satisfying the obligations. The ex-husband's estate sought to offset payment of the DSA's outstanding obligations with payment defendant received as the pay-on-death (POD) beneficiary when she redeemed federal savings bonds owned by her ex-husband. Although her ex-husband had not changed or revoked the POD beneficiary designation on the bonds following the divorce as permitted under federal regulations and the DSA was silent as to the disposition of the bonds, the trial court applied the presumptive revocation provision of N.J.S.A. 3B:3-14 to grant the estate partial summary judgment, allowing the redemption of the savings bonds to partially satisfy the DSA obligations. The court reversed, holding that because federal regulations govern the rights and obligations created by a beneficiary's bond ownership, absent evidence of fraud, breach of trust, or other wrongful conversion of property, the regulations take precedence and preempt the inconsistent provisions of N.J.S.A. 3B:3-14. The court held that by determining defendant's beneficiary designation was automatically revoked under N.J.S.A. 3B:3-14 by virtue of the divorce, the trial court misinterpreted the DSA and failed to give effect to defendant's federal ownership rights, "render[ing] the award of title meaningless." Free v. Bland , 369 U.S. 663, 669 (1962). Close
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. MANTWAN J. THOMAS (21-08-0498, UNION COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-2994-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- GEORGIOS DROSOS, ET AL. VS. GMM GLOBAL MONEY MANAGERS LTD., ET AL. (L-1053-22, BERGEN COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-3674-21 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- C.A.L. VS. A.C. (FV-12-1696-22, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) (RECORD IMPOUNDED) A-0099-22 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- CANDE LAND 2020, LLC VS. RAMON DIAZ (MID-LT-005379-20, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-0435-22 Appellate Nov. 14, 2023
- IN THE MATTER OF W.D., POLICE OFFICER, ETC. (NEW JERSEY CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION) A-3041-20 Appellate Nov. 15, 2023
- STATE OF NEW JERSEY VS. DAVID COMPANIONI (13-06-0114, ESSEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1549-21 Appellate Nov. 15, 2023
- GARDEN STATE COMMERCIAL SERVICES, LLC VS. PIETRO CUCARO (C-000117-18, MIDDLESEX COUNTY AND STATEWIDE) A-1891-21 Appellate Nov. 15, 2023