Appellate Division opinions designated as not for publication do not often address legal issues such as whether and when a judgment under appeal is final. But today, the Appellate Division issued two opinions that touch on that subject in different contexts. Williams v. County of Middlesex, 2021 N.J. Super Unpub. LEXIS 1580 (App. Div. July 28, 2021), was a suit by plaintiff corrections officers against a number of defendants. Plaintiffs alleged that they had been physically and emotionally injured, and had been subjected to disciplinary charges, after they had intervened in a fight between a...

In re D.L.B., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2021); Valarezo-Tirado v. Attorney General of the United States of America, ___ F.4th ___ (3d Cir. 2021). It is a fundamental rule that courts must provide findings and reasons for their decisions. Litigants deserve to know why they won or lost, and reviewing courts (if cases go on appeal) need to know what decision they are reviewing. In the last two days, these two cases, one from the Appellate Division and one from the Third Circuit, re-emphasized the importance of findings and reasons for decision. In re D.L.B. was a case under New...

Zilberberg v. Board of Trustees, Teachers’ Pension & Annuity Fund, ___ N.J. Siper. ___ (App. Div. 2021). Barbara Zilberg, a former school psychologist, got a pension loan in 2004 from the Teachers’ Pension and Annuity Fund (“TPAF”). Judge Whipple’s opinion for the Appellate Division today explained that “TPAF is a tax-qualified governmental plan under the Internal Revenue Code (IRC), which regulates how members may borrow and repay money from TPAF. Pension loans through TPAF are repaid by active employees through payroll deductions, or by retirees...