Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP v. New Jersey Dep’t of Law & Public Safety, 421 N.J. Super. 489 (App. Div. 2011).  Under settled caselaw, litigation discovery that is not filed with the court during the course of a case will normally remain confidential against requests by a non-party that the discovery be made public.  The question in this case was whether production of discovery taken by private counsel in a case brought by a

Canter v. Lakewood of Voorhees, 420 N.J. Super. 508 (App. Div. 2011).  Under cases such as State v. Ventron, 94 N.J. 473 (1983), a court may, in proper circumstances, “pierce the veil” of a corporation and hold owners of that corporation liable for wrongdoing.  The question in this case was whether such piercing can occur when the allegedly offending entity is a limited partnership, or whether the New Jersey Uniform Limited Partnership Law, N.J.S.A. 42:2A-

Frumer v. Nat’l Home Ins. Co., 420 N.J. Super. 7 (App. Div. 2011).   This short opinion by Judge Simonelli, which involved claims under a new home warranty, reverses a lower court’s refusal to compel arbitration despite the seemingly plain language of an arbitration clause in the warranty documents.  The opinion reaffirms the strong state policy in favor of arbitration where, as here, parties agree to it.  Judge Simonelli also noted that the standard of review o