Lee v. Brown, ___ N.J. ___ (2018).  [Disclosure:  My firm, Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC, represented certain defendants in this case who were dismissed from the case on motion prior to the appeal that is the subject of this post]  Today’s unanimous opinion by Justice Fernandez-Vina deals with whether the appellants, the City of Paterson and one of its employees, an electrical inspector, were entitled to absolute immunity under the New Jersey Tort Cl

On this date in 1961, the Supreme Court decided 525 Main St. Corp. v. Eagle Roofing Corp., 34 N.J. 251 (1961).  The Court’s opinion, a 5-0 decision, was written by Chief Justice Weintraub.

The case involved a roof on an industrial building.  Defendant contracted with the assignor of plaintiff to repair the roof, and defendant gave a five-year guarantee against leaks, along with a promise to repair.  After about two years, leaks appeared.  Defendant made some repairs but then refused to do anything further.  Plaintiff got another roofer to repair the roof and then

Last week, the Supreme Court announced that it had granted certification in five more cases.  Three of them are criminal appeals, one involves additur after a jury verdict, and one implicates the entire controversy doctrine.

The question presented in State v. Santamaria, as phrased by the Supreme Court Clerk’s Office, is “Did the State’s introduction of more than fifty sexually explicit photographs, which were taken after the victim turned eighteen, for the purpose of establishing the existence of a sexual relationship between defendant and the victim when the