My firm, Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLC, was successful in two Appellate Division cases within the last few days.  Last week, in Villaquiran v. All-State International, Inc.,  2014 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1633 (App.  Div. July 8, 2014), one of my cases, the Appellate Division reversed a ruling of the Law Division that an employee (LDG’s client on appeal, but represented by different counsel below) who had

Litwin v. Whirlpool Corp., 436 N.J. Super. 80 (App. Div. 2014).  In Portee v. Jaffee, 84 N.J. 88 (1980), the Supreme Court established “a cause of action for damages to a bystander as a result of witnessing an injury-producing event to one with whom the bystander has an intimate or familial relationship,” as this opinion by Judge Sapp-Peterson summarized it.  One element of a Portee claim is “[o]bservation of the death or injury at the scene of the

Regalado v. Curling, 430 N.J. Super. 342 (App. Div. 2013).  The lesson of this short opinion by Judge Sapp-Peterson, issued the day after this appeal was orally argued due to the need for speed, is that “[e]lection laws are to be liberally construed” and may be “relaxed where enforcement of the right of choice in the election process is unreasonably thwarted.”  Plaintiff had sought to compel defendant, the municipal clerk of the City of Passaic, from printing ball