Paladino v. Auletta Enterprises, Inc., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). The work product privilege, or “work product doctrine,” as it is also sometimes labeled, was first recognized by the Supreme Court of the United States in 1947, and by New Jersey in 1948. Judge Gilson’s opinion in this appeal contains a detailed history of the work product privilege, which is now embodied in Rule 4:10-2(c). The specific issue on this slip and fall appeal, however, was whether work performed by an investigator for the company that insured the catering venue at which plaintiff fell...

Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. v. Jackson, ___ U.S. ___ (2019). Among other changes made by the so-called Class Action Fairness Act of 2005, 28 U.S.C. 1453(b) (“CAFA”) made it easier for class action defendants to remove to federal court putative class action cases filed in state courts. That provision states that a class action may be removed by “any defendant without the consent of all defendants.” CAFA supplemented the general removal statute, 28 U.S.C. 1441(a), which permits removal of any civil action “by the defendant or the defendants.” But what about the...

In the last several weeks, this blog has largely focused on Supreme Court decisions and grants of review. That was not meant to slight the Appellate Division, whose judges have made some important rulings as well. Here are summaries of some of the most significant published rulings of the Appellate Division during that period: Sosa v. Massachusetts Bay Ins. Co., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2019). In an opinion by Judge Ostrer that focused on the language and effect of a water damage exclusion in the subject homeowner’s insurance policy, the Appellate Division reversed a summary...