The Supreme Court announced late yesterday that it has granted certification in three more cases.  In the first matter, Serico v. Rothberg, the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s office, is “Did plaintiff waive her right to pursue attorney’s fees, pursuant to the offer of judgment rule (R. 4:58-1 to -6), by entering into a high-low agreement without expressly reserving her right to recover fees?”  The opinion of the Appellate Division, which was discussed

Fairfax Financial Holdings Limited v. SAC Capital Management, LLC, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2017).  Judge Fisher often is able to write remarkably concise opinions, as shown (for example here and

The Supreme Court has granted review in five cases.  One of them is an appeal as of right, by virtue of a dissent in the Appellate Division.  That case is State v. Twiggs.  The question presented there, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “When addressing the statute of limitations in a criminal matter, is N.J.S.A. 2C:1-6’s tolling provision- which applies when ‘the actor’ is identified by means of DNA evidence- triggered where the DNA analyzed belongs to a third party, rather than the defendant?”  The Appellate Division’