Holtham v. Lucas, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). As Judge Ostrer noted in the first sentence of his opinion in this case today, “[a]ccording to well-settled contract law, a provision that stipulates an unreasonably large amount of damages for a future breach is an unenforceable penalty.” The parties to this matrimonial case entered into a marital settlement agreement that contained a “per diem penalty of $150” for any breach of any duty under that agreement. When plaintiff failed to timely pay off a loan on a car that was to be distributed to his (ex-)wife and...

G.A.-H. v. K.G.G., ___ N.J. ___ (2019). As noted here, the Supreme Court granted review in this case to address this issue: “Is an individual subject to tort liability for purportedly failing to alert a victim or alert authorities that a co-worker has engaged in the sexual abuse of a minor, under the circumstances presented?” The Appellate Division’s opinion, reported at 455 N.J. Super. 294 (App. Div. 2018), and discussed here, raised that provocative issue, but found the record insufficient to decide it. Today, the Supreme Court found that the facts were such that no...

Last week, the Appellate Division issued four published opinions on a single day, as discussed here. Today, the court released three published decisions. Here are summaries of those opinions: New Jersey Div. of Child Protection & Permanency v. B.H., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). This was an abuse and neglect appeal under Title 9. B.H. was the boyfriend of H.S. He was accused of abusing or neglecting H.S.’s daughter, M.S. Title 9 defines “abused or neglected child” as one who is impaired, or in danger of impairment, due to the failure of his or her “parent...