Abboud v. National Union Fire Ins. Co., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2017).  This opinion by Judge Ostrer interpreted an “insured vs. insured” exclusion in a directors and officers liability insurance policy.  That exclusion generally bars coverage for claims by one insured against another, such as counterclaims brought against plaintiff by his fellow officers of a limited liability company and that LLC itself.  After the insurer denied coverage, plaintiff

Reilly v. City of Harrisburg, ___ F.3d ___ (3d Cir. 2017).  This case involved claims by plaintiffs that an ordinance of the City of Harrisburg unconstitutionally deprived them of the ability to protest outside abortion clinics.  The District Court denied a preliminary injunction.  Plaintiffs appealed, asking the Third Circuit to address the ultimate merits of their constitutional claim.  Speaking through Judge Ambro, the court declined to do that.  But the panel did write a de

In re N.J.A.C. 12:17-2.1, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2017).  Given the deferential standard of review of the validity of regulations promulgated by administrative agencies, it is relatively rare that a court finds such a regulation to be arbitrary and capricious, and therefore invalid.  Today’s opinion by Judge Sabatino, however, does just that, regarding a regulation promulgated by the New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development.  The panel recognized that its scope