<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<?xml-stylesheet type="text/xsl" media="screen" href="/~d/styles/rss2full.xsl"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~d/styles/itemcontent.css"?><rss xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/" xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/" xmlns:feedburner="http://rssnamespace.org/feedburner/ext/1.0" version="2.0">

<channel>
	<title>Appellate Law NJ Blog</title>
	
	<link>http://appellatelaw-nj.com</link>
	<description>Focusing on New Jersey appeals, and New Jersey appellate law and practice</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 00:44:29 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator>
<xhtml:meta xmlns:xhtml="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" name="robots" content="noindex" />
		<atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" href="http://feeds.feedburner.com/AppellateLawNjBlog" /><feedburner:info uri="appellatelawnjblog" /><atom10:link xmlns:atom10="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" rel="hub" href="http://pubsubhubbub.appspot.com/" /><feedburner:emailServiceId>AppellateLawNjBlog</feedburner:emailServiceId><feedburner:feedburnerHostname>http://feedburner.google.com</feedburner:feedburnerHostname><item>
		<title>Three Appellate Practice Nuggets from the NJSBA Annual Meeting</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/3GhCwJ3BDXw/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/three-appellate-practice-nuggets-from-the-njsba-annual-meeting/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 18 May 2012 00:44:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Practice Pointers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Carmen Messano]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Philip Carchman]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4493</guid>
		<description>The NJSBA Annual Meeting in Atlantic City featured a program today on the &amp;#8220;nuts and bolts&amp;#8221; of appellate practice.  The panel of speakers was headed by Judges Carchman and Messano.  Naturally, many of the &amp;#8220;nuts and bolts&amp;#8221; were the kinds of things that, though useful, have been said elsewhere, such as here and here.  At [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/3GhCwJ3BDXw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/three-appellate-practice-nuggets-from-the-njsba-annual-meeting/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/three-appellate-practice-nuggets-from-the-njsba-annual-meeting/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>“Presumed Damages” Doctrine Remains Viable in Defamation Cases Involving Purely Private Plaintiff Cases</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/mup55llA4ng/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/presumed-damages-doctrine-remains-viable-in-defamation-cases-involving-purely-private-plaintiff-cases/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 16 May 2012 21:33:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Effect of decisions by other courts]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of New Jersey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4483</guid>
		<description>W.J.A. v. D.A., ___ N.J. ___ (2012).  The doctrine of &amp;#8220;presumed damages&amp;#8221; allows plaintiffs in defamation cases to obtain damages even without a showing of actual harm to the plaintiff&amp;#8217;s reputation.  In slander cases (other than those involving slander per se, which entails accusations of crime, loathsome disease, serious sexual misconduct, or misfeasance in business), a plaintiff must prove [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/mup55llA4ng" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/presumed-damages-doctrine-remains-viable-in-defamation-cases-involving-purely-private-plaintiff-cases/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/presumed-damages-doctrine-remains-viable-in-defamation-cases-involving-purely-private-plaintiff-cases/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>JCP&amp;L Can be Liable for Negligent Placement of Electrical Pole</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/2NzBSRt1Qjw/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/jcpl-can-be-liable-for-negligent-placement-of-electrical-pole/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 18:45:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Summary judgment]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice Barry Albin]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4474</guid>
		<description>Seals v. County of Morris, ___ N.J. ___ (2012).  While driving on a snow-covered road, plaintiffs could not negotiate a curve in the road and struck a JCP&amp;#38;L electrical pole located near the side of that road.  The County of Morris did not own, but did have an easement over, the property on which the pole [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/2NzBSRt1Qjw" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/jcpl-can-be-liable-for-negligent-placement-of-electrical-pole/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/jcpl-can-be-liable-for-negligent-placement-of-electrical-pole/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney Charging Lien Subordinated to Interest of Preserving Funds for Children’s Education</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/Gm_LBs1Srw8/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-charging-lien-subordinated-to-interest-of-preserving-funds-for-childrens-education/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 00:33:53 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chancery issues]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Standards of review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Family Part]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jose Fuentes]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4462</guid>
		<description>Sauro v. Sauro, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2012).  This contentious divorce action boiled down to the complaint of a large law firm that an equitable distribution award was improper because, in making that award, the Family Part improperly elevated the interests of the divorcing couple&amp;#8217;s children in having money available for their college education above the [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/Gm_LBs1Srw8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-charging-lien-subordinated-to-interest-of-preserving-funds-for-childrens-education/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-charging-lien-subordinated-to-interest-of-preserving-funds-for-childrens-education/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Cap on Sick Leave Payments to School Administrators Upheld</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/F9_AYWoZK3s/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/cap-on-sick-leave-payments-to-school-adminstrators-upheld/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 10 May 2012 12:59:06 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Administrative agency actions]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Standards of review]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Statutory interpretation]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Chief Justice Stuart Rabner]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4446</guid>
		<description>New Jersey Ass&amp;#8217;n of School Adminstrators v. Schundler, ___ N.J. ___ (2012).  This case required the Supreme Court to parse and reconcile an unusually complex scheme of statutes and regulations that dealt with benefits available by contract to high-level school administrators.  In 2007, the Legislature passed measures designed to hold down property taxes and to [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/F9_AYWoZK3s" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/cap-on-sick-leave-payments-to-school-adminstrators-upheld/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/cap-on-sick-leave-payments-to-school-adminstrators-upheld/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Supreme Court Will Review Emma v. Evans</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/oCny4yGZm-A/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/supreme-court-will-review-emma-v-evans/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 08 May 2012 11:32:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of New Jersey]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4437</guid>
		<description>In Emma v. Evans, 424 N.J. Super. 36 (App. Div. 2012), the Appellate Division addressed the question of whether the presumption in favor of the parent of primary residence who seeks a surname change for a child, established in Gubernat v. December, 140 N.J. 120 (1985), where the parents were unmarried, applies to a child whose parents were married but got [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/oCny4yGZm-A" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/supreme-court-will-review-emma-v-evans/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/supreme-court-will-review-emma-v-evans/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>Attorney Disqualified From Representing Party in Same Matter Where Attorney Previously Represented Adverse Party</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/y6D3lfGu7nE/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-disqualified-from-representing-party-in-same-matter-where-attorney-previously-represented-adverse-party/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 15:28:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Supreme Court of New Jersey]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Court Rules]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Justice Helen Hoens]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4427</guid>
		<description>Twenty-First Century Rail Corp. v. New Jersey Transit Corp., ___ N.J. ___ (2012).  This case involved an effort to disqualify counsel in a construction case for a conflict of interest under Rule of Professional Conduct 1.9 (&amp;#8220;RPC 1.9&amp;#8243;).  The Law Division denied disqualification.  In a published opinion, reported at 419 N.J. Super. 343 (App. Div. 2011), [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/y6D3lfGu7nE" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-disqualified-from-representing-party-in-same-matter-where-attorney-previously-represented-adverse-party/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/attorney-disqualified-from-representing-party-in-same-matter-where-attorney-previously-represented-adverse-party/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>“Are Oral Arguments Worth Arguing About?”</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/1ChLoyiw42Y/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/are-oral-arguments-worth-arguing-about/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Mon, 07 May 2012 13:29:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Practice Pointers]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4418</guid>
		<description>Yesterday&amp;#8217;s New York Times contained a column by Adam Liptak, who covers the Supreme Court of the United States, entitled &amp;#8220;Are Oral Arguments Worth Arguing About?&amp;#8221;  That column makes the point that, ultimately, whether an appellate oral advocate delivers his or her oral argument seamlessly matters far less than the merits of the case.  The [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/1ChLoyiw42Y" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/are-oral-arguments-worth-arguing-about/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/are-oral-arguments-worth-arguing-about/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>The Boundaries of Expert Opinion</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/qLn-HPufFjk/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/the-boundaries-of-expert-opinion/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 May 2012 15:54:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Appellate Division]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judges]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Judge Jack Sabatino]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4405</guid>
		<description>State v. Locascio, ___ N.J. Super. ___ (App. Div. 2012).  Expert opinion is an area in which decisions in the criminal realm find their way into civil cases as well.  For example, State v. Kemp, 174 N.J. 412 (2002), is often cited in cases of any type that involve the proper scope of expert testimony.  Today&amp;#8217;s [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/qLn-HPufFjk" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/the-boundaries-of-expert-opinion/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/the-boundaries-of-expert-opinion/</feedburner:origLink></item>
		<item>
		<title>An Embarrassing Anniversary for Justice Holmes and the U.S. Supreme Court</title>
		<link>http://feedproxy.google.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~3/_kTNfMR8jh8/</link>
		<comments>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/an-embarrassing-anniversary-for-justice-holmes-and-the-u-s-supreme-court/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 May 2012 14:57:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Bruce D. Greenberg</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Notable opinion writing]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[United States Supreme Court]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://appellatelaw-nj.com/?p=4395</guid>
		<description>Even Justice Holmes, one of the greatest Justices of the Supreme Court of the United States, sometimes made extremely bad decisions.  Eighty five years ago today, in Buck v. Bell, 274 U.S. 200 (1927), Justice Holmes, joined by all other Justices except one, issued perhaps his worst ruling as a Justice.  A gathering of legal scholars [...]&lt;img src="http://feeds.feedburner.com/~r/AppellateLawNjBlog/~4/_kTNfMR8jh8" height="1" width="1"/&gt;</description>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/an-embarrassing-anniversary-for-justice-holmes-and-the-u-s-supreme-court/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
		<feedburner:origLink>http://appellatelaw-nj.com/an-embarrassing-anniversary-for-justice-holmes-and-the-u-s-supreme-court/</feedburner:origLink></item>
	</channel>
</rss>

