Pisack v. B&C Towing, Inc., ___ N.J. ___ (2020). This matter involved multiple consolidated consumer class actions challenging the fees charged by the defendant towing companies, which towed plaintiffs’ vehicles at the direction of the police without plaintiffs’ consent. As discussed here, after trial level proceedings produced differing results, the Appellate Division issued a published opinion, reported at 455 N.J. Super. 225 (App. Div. 2018), that resolved, largely in plaintiffs’ favor, a number of issues under the Predatory Towing Prevention Act, N.J.S.A. 56:13-7 et seq. (“Towing Act’), the Consumer Fraud Act, N.J.S.A. 56:8-1 et seq. (“CFA”), and the Truth in Consumer Contract, Warranty, and Notice Act, N.J.S.A. 56:12-14 et seq. (“TCCWNA”). read more

Triffin v. Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Auth., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2020). Judge Fisher issued the Appellate Division’s opinion on this appeal just eight days after it was argued. The issue was not complex. read more

Last night’s meeting of the New Jersey State Bar Association’s Appellate Practice Committee featured a guest appearance by Judges Koblitz and Sumners. They took questions and shared advice about appellate practice, including what they like to see (and hear) and what they dislike. Some of that was familiar from comparable presentations by other Appellate Division judges. Other things reflected the thoughts of these particular jurists. Here are some highlights. read more

Hager v. M&K Construction, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2020). Issues relating to medical marijuana have been very contentious. Among other things, the fact that the federal government has continued to treat marijuana as a Schedule I controlled dangerous substance, whose production or distribution is a federal felony, even as states have begun to legalize marijuana, has created complications. Even possession of marijuana can be a federal crime, as Judge Currier noted in her opinion for the Appellate Division in this matter. read more

New Jersey Division of Child Protection and Permanency v. A.L., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2020). On October 28, 2019, in a per curiam opinion that can be found at 2019 WL 5544014 (App. Div. Oct. 28, 2019), Judges Fisher and Rose affirmed a Family Part decision finding defendant guilty of child abuse and neglect. After summarizing the facts and the arguments presented by defendant and the Law Guardian on appeal, the panel found that those contentions lacked sufficient merit to warrant further discussion in a written opinion, citing Rule 2:11-3(e)(1)(E), and affirmed based on the “comprehensive and well-reasoned written opinion” of the Family Part judge, Judge Bruce Kaplan. read more

Meisels v. Fox Rothschild LLP, ___ N.J. ___ (2020). Plaintiff was involved in a real estate transaction with a client of defendant Fox Rothschild, Weinstein. An intermediary for plaintiff wired money to the law firm in connection with that transaction. The wire did not identify plaintiff as the owner of the funds, and no instructions accompanied the wire. read more

Delanoy v. Township of Ocean, ___ N..J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2020). The first New Jersey state court published opinion of 2020 goes to Judge Sabatino. The case arose under the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (“PWFA”), a 2014 amendment to the New Jersey Law Against Discrimination, N.J.S.A. 10:5-12(s). Judge Sabatino observed that the statute “ha[d] yet to be construed in a published opinion” before the Appellate Division’s decision here. read more

To start the new year, the Third Circuit announced that beginning on January 1, 2020, “docket entries listed on the Court’s docket will be numbered. All cases opened in 2020 will have consecutive numbers assigned to each entry.” read more