The Supreme Court has granted certification to review three more appeals.  The first of those actually consists of four cases that have been consolidated under the lead case, State v. Hester.  The question presented in that case, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Do the Ex Post Facto Clauses of the United States and New Jersey Constitutions preclude defendants from being charged, under a 2014 amendment to the applicable statute, with third-degree violations of their special sentences of community supervision for life (CSL)?”  In a published op

The Supreme Court has granted review in four more cases.  In Cherokee LCP Land, LLC v. City of Linden Planning Bd., the question presented, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Do plaintiffs have a sufficient interest in the property adjacent to the property to be developed (the development property), such that they have standing to challenge the municipal planning board’s site plan approval for the development property?”

An award of attorneys’ fees is at the heart of Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc.   The quest

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’