1 Analyses of this case by attorneys

  1. Making Concessions at Oral Argument

    Lite DePalma Greenberg, LLCBruce GreenbergJanuary 31, 2013

    Judge Espinosa then asked, in a teasing tone with a big smile on her face, whether the attorney was really contending that when a Supreme Court opinion contains a procedural directive that, by the Court’s express language, was effective immediately, that directive in fact did not become effective until a Court Rule embodying it was adopted and approved. Plainly, she was incredulous, as indeed she should have been, since the Supreme Court ruled forty years ago, in Busik v. Levine, 63 N.J. 351, 362-63 (1973) (plurality opinion), that it could exercise its constitutionally-based rulemaking power in the context of an opinion in a particular case rather than only through the rulemaking process. The attorney thought the better of what he had said, and conceded that he was not taking such a position.