We use cookies to customise content for your subscription and for analytics.
If you continue to browse Lexology, we will assume that you are happy to receive all our cookies. For further information please read our Cookie Policy.

Search results

Order by: most recent most popular relevance



Results: 1-10 of 43

Are Exceptions Starting To Swallow The "American Rule" In New Jersey?
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • April 28 2016

The answer to that question would appear to be: it depends who you ask. In a pair of decisions released on April 26, 2016, Innes v. Marzano-Lesnevich


Appellate Division Vindicates Counsel Who Was Punished By Trial Court For Being Ready For Trial
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • April 26 2016

Yes, you read that headline right. In Acevedo v. Masih, defense counsel was ready for trial on the trial date but the trial court nonetheless entered


Jury Instructions Deemed Ambiguous "AndOr" Erroneous "AndOr" A "Mongrel Expression"
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • January 25 2016

When I used to teach Legal Research and Writing, one of the phrases I encouraged my students to avoid was "andor." Like a lot of legalese, I think


Is a locked, fenced-in parking lot a "structure"? It is in New Jersey.
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • July 1 2015

I was in law school during the Bill ClintonMonica Lewinsky drama. When the pundits seized on Bill Clinton's grand jury testimony about what the


"Judges think I am awesome!" Third Circuit approves use of judicial endorsement on lawyer's website
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • August 11 2014

A New Jersey trial court issued an interesting opinion last week, allowing a lender to foreclose but imposing significant limitations on the lender


Who holds the attorney-client privilege after a merger?
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • January 28 2014

A recent decision from the Delaware Chancery Court is a must read for in-house and outside counsel representing companies involved in mergers and


The United States Department of Labor issues guidance regarding same-sex marriages and its impact on employee benefits
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • September 30 2013

Two months ago, in the July 2013 edition of Porzio's Employment Law Monthly we discussed the United States Supreme Court's landmark decision in


Supreme Court strikes down Defense of Marriage Act, creating new rights for same-sex spouses and new obligations for employers
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • July 17 2013

In the much-anticipated, landmark ruling on June 26, 2013, the Supreme Court struck down as unconstitutional a portion of the Defense of Marriage Act


Underage drinking conviction overturned because: 1) sniff test for alcohol insufficient; 2) Miranda violations; and 3) improperly excluded evidence
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • October 14 2011

In State v. Koch, No. A-0602-10 (App. Div. Sept. 26, 2011), the defendant was convicted in municipal court of underage consumption of alcohol


A case that could have been on “To Catch a Predator”
  • Porzio Bromberg & Newman PC
  • USA
  • September 20 2011

State v. Champagne, No. A-1365-08 (App. Div. Sept. 19, 2011), sounds like a case that could have been featured on the NBC show, “To Catch a Predator.”