Appellate Law NJ Blog
  • Home
  • Bruce Greenberg
Jun 11

No New Trial for Plaintiff Who Strategically Did Not Object to Trial Testimony That Was Inconsistent With Discovery Responses

Posted by Bruce D. Greenberg on Jun 11, 2019 in Effect of decisions by other courts, Judges, Jury issues, Standards of review, Supreme Court of New Jersey | 0 comments
T.L. v. Goldberg, 238 N.J. 218 (2019). The issue in this medical malpractice case was whether plaintiff was entitled to a new trial because defendant, without objection by plaintiff, offered trial testimony that was inconsistent with his discovery responses. That issue produced a 2-1 split in the Appellate Division, whose ruling was reported at 453 N.J. Super. 539 (App. Div. 2018). As discussed here, the majority ordered a new trial, finding that the situation here paralleled that of McKenney v. Jersey City Med. Center, 167 N.J. 359 (2001). Judge Currier dissented. In a unanimous decision by...
Mar 12

Today’s Third Circuit Opinion: “Argued October 28, 2015 (Opinion Filed March 12, 2019)”

Posted by Bruce D. Greenberg on Mar 12, 2019 in Effect of decisions by other courts, Judges, Jury issues, Third Circuit Court of Appeals | 1 comment
Komis v. Secretary of the United States Department of Labor, 918 F.3d 289 (3d Cir. 2019).  This opinion by Judge Scirica today affirmed the result of a jury trial in this Title VII retaliation and retaliatory hostile work environment case.  Judge Scirica encapsulated virtually the entire ruling of the panel in the second paragraph of his opinion: “This appeal requires us to decide whether federal employees may bring retaliation claims under Title VII.  We conclude they may.  We are then asked to consider whether the same standard governs federal- and private-sector retaliation claims,...
Dec 27

Trial Judges Have Discretion to Replay Counsel’s Summations Upon a Jury’s Request

Posted by Bruce D. Greenberg on Dec 27, 2018 in Appellate Division, Criminal law, Effect of decisions by other courts, Judges, Jury issues | 0 comments
State v. Brown, 457 N.J. Super. 345 (App. Div. 2018).  Deliberating jurors often request that trial testimony be read back to them.  As Judge Sabatino noted n his opinion in this case today, the Supreme Court has held that “absent some unusual circumstance, those requests should be granted.”  But what is to be done when a jury requests that counsel’s summation, which is not evidence, be read back?  That was the issue in the published portion of Judge Sabatino’s decision in this drug case, where the jury asked to hear defense counsel’s summation again. ...
« Older Entries

About the Author

Bruce D. Greenberg, a partner of Lite DePalma Greenberg & Afanador, LLC, has more than 35 years of appellate experience.  He has argued dozens of cases in New Jersey’s Appellate Division, and he has handled oral arguments in the Supreme Court of New Jersey and the Third Circuit Court of Appeals as well.  Mr. Greenberg’s appellate cases have ranged from . . more

 

Subscribe

  • reader reader
  • Subscribe to Appellate Law NJ Blog by Email

Archives

Links

  • An Appeal to Reason – California Appellate blog
  • Class Action Blawg
  • De Novo- Virginia Appellate Law blog
  • Florida Appellate Review
  • How Appealing
  • Maine Appeals Blog
  • New York Appellate Law blog
  • NJ Judiciary
  • On Brief – Iowa Appellate Law Blog
  • Third Circuit Blog
  • Third Circuit Court of Appeals

Categories

  • Administrative agency actions
  • Administrative matters
  • Appellate Division
  • Attorneys fees
  • Case management
  • Chancery issues
  • Class actions
  • Constitutional law
  • Consumer protection
  • Contract interpretation
  • Criminal law
  • Discovery
  • Effect of decisions by other courts
  • Judges
  • Jury issues
  • Municipal land use
  • Notable opinion writing
  • Pleadings
  • Practice Pointers
  • Standards of review
  • Statutory interpretation
  • Summary judgment
  • Supreme Court of New Jersey
  • Third Circuit Court of Appeals
  • Uncategorized
  • United States Supreme Court

Tags

Administrative agency actions Appendix Arbitration Briefs Chief Justice Stuart Rabner Court Rules Family Part interlocutory vs. final decisions Judge Allison Accurso Judge Anthony Parrillo Judge Carmen Alvarez Judge Carmen Messano Judge Clarkson Fisher Judge D. Brooks Smith Judge Douglas Fasciale Judge Ellen Koblitz Judge Heidi Willis Currier Judge Jack Sabatino Judge Jose Fuentes Judge Julio Fuentes Judge Marianne Espinosa Judge Marie Lihotz Judge Mary Catherine Cuff Judge Mitchel Ostrer Judge Patty Shwartz Judge Stephen Skillman Judge Susan Reisner Judge Thomas Ambro Judge Thomas Hardiman Judge Victor Ashrafi Justice Anne Patterson Justice Barry Albin Justice Faustino Fernandez-Vina Justice Helen Hoens Justice Jaynee LaVecchia Justice Lee Solomon Justice Roberto Rivera-Soto Justice Walter Timpone Law of the case Makeup of court Notice of appeal Prerogative writ appeals Standing Statute of limitations Waiver

Designed by Elegant Themes | Powered by Wordpress