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...

Feuer v. Merck & Co., Inc., ___ N.J. ___ (2019). As discussed here, the Appellate Division, in an opinion by Judge Ostrer that was reported at 455 N.J. Super. 69 (App. Div. 2019), affirmed (after de novo review of the legal issues involved) a ruling of the Chancery Division that had ruled against plaintiff, a Merck shareholder, in his demand to review various Merck documents. Plaintiff had invoked both N.J.S.A. 14A:5-28 and the common law. Today, in a 6-0 vote, the Supreme Court affirmed based on Judge Ostrer’s opinion. In essence, the Appellate Division concluded that...

Due to travel over most of the past two weeks (and getting “back in the game” once having returned), there have been no posts here.  But the courts have been active during that time.  Here, in brief, are some of the key published decisions of the Supreme Court, the Appellate Division, and the Third Circuit: Paff v. Ocean County Prosecutor’s Office, 235 N.J. 1 (2018).  This was a 4-3 decision that reversed a ruling of the Appellate Division, reported at 446 N.J. Super. 163 (App. Div. 2016).  That court, by a 2-1 vote, had held that recordings made by mobile video recorders...