On this date in 2003, the Appellate Division decided Seacoast Builders Corp. v. Rutgers, 358 N.J. Super. 524 (App. Div. 2003).  This was a relatively rare case in which the Appellate Division exercised original jurisdiction under Rule 2:10-5 to decide a discovery issue.  It was an even more rare result, since the panel ordered that documents otherwise protected by privilege be disclosed as a sanction for attorney misconduct.

This was a breach of construction contract case involving the alleged failure of Rutgers University to pay plaintiff on a multi-million dollar change

175 Executive House, LLC v. Miles, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2017).  A tenant who receives a rent subsidy under the federal “Section 8” voucher program, 42 U.S.C. §1437 to 1437z-9, cannot be evicted for non-payment of amounts not defined as rent, or for amounts that are “additional rent,” if the tenant is current with his or her share of the rent payments.  That was the holding of Sudersan v. Royal, 386 N.J. Super. 246 (App. Div. 2005).

Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc., ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2017).  On February 6, 2017, the Appellate Division issued a published opinion in this case, which was discussed here.  In that opinion, the panel dismissed defendant’s cross-appeal from the denial of its motion for summary judgment because defendant had not included in the appellate a