New clients email us evenings and weekends go to www.njlaws.com/ContactKenV.htmKenneth Mr. Vercammen was included in the 2017 “Super Lawyers” list published by Thomson Reuters.

Kenneth Vercammen is a Middlesex County trial attorney who has published 130 articles in national and New Jersey publications on litigation topics. He was awarded the NJ State State Bar Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year. He lectures for the Bar and handles litigation matters. He is Past Chair of the ABA Tort & Insurance Committee,GP on Personal Injury and was a speaker at the ABA Annual Meeting attended by 10,000 attorneys and professionals. To schedule a confidential consultation, email us at VercammenAppointments@NJlaws.com, call or

visit Website www.njlaws.com

Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C.

2053 Woodbridge Avenue - Edison, NJ 08817

(732) 572-0500

Tuesday, February 14, 2012

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION XIANGJING ZAHN TO CHANGE THE NAME OF HONGHONG ZHAN, A MINOR, TO MICHELLE HONGHONG ZHAN

 IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION XIANGJING ZAHN TO           CHANGE THE NAME OF HONGHONG ZHAN, A MINOR, TO MICHELLE           HONGHONG ZHAN           A-6113-10T1 
     A permanent resident alien may obtain a legal change of name pursuant to N.J.S.A. 2A:52-1 to -4.   We reverse the trial court's order, which dismissed a name change application on the basis that relief under the statute was limited to United States citizens.  02-14-12 

IN RE: PETITION FOR REFERENDUM TO REPEAL ORDINANCE 2010-17 OF THE CITY OF MARGATE CITY, ATLANTIC COUNTY, STATE OF NEW JERSEY

IN RE: PETITION FOR REFERENDUM TO REPEAL ORDINANCE           2010-17 OF THE CITY OF MARGATE CITY, ATLANTIC COUNTY,           STATE OF NEW JERSEY           JOHN STEVEN WOERNER, ET AL. VS. THOMAS D. HILTNER, ET           AL. 

A-2475-10T1

     The section of the Home Rule Act that establishes the right to a public referendum regarding any ordinance authorizing the incurring of an indebtedness applies to a municipality organized under the Walsh Act.  02-14-12  

DOUGLAS D. DAVIS VS. JUSTIN B. BARKASZI, ET AL. A-2345-10T1

DOUGLAS D. DAVIS VS. JUSTIN B. BARKASZI, ET AL.           A-2345-10T1 
     In this dram shop case where the accident occurred only minutes after the driver left the defendant bar, we reverse and remand for a new trial because the trial court erred in three respects.  The judge failed to charge the jury that if it found that alcohol was negligently served, that alcohol must have had time to enter the bloodstream of the driver prior to the accident to be a proximate cause.  The judge also improperly charged the jury that the driver had an average tolerance to alcohol after precluding the defense from exploring this issue with lay witnesses.  The judge erred as well in his spoliation charge because plaintiff failed to make the threshold showing that the bar improperly destroyed its video surveillance footage.  This error was particularly harmful because the judge did not allow the jury to hear testimony concerning the reasons why the bar chose not to preserve the footage.  02-09-12  

NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY VS. INTERMODAL PROPERTIES, LLC A-3353-09T2

NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAILWAY COMPANY VS. INTERMODAL           PROPERTIES, LLC 

A-3353-09T2

page1image18576
page1image18848
page1image19120
page1image19392
page1image19664
page1image19936
page1image20208
page1image20480
page1image20752
page1image21024
page1image21296
page1image21568
page1image21840
In this case, where the railroad sought approval from the Department of Transportation to acquire private property by the exercise of the State's power of eminent domain, we hold that: 1) N.J.S.A. 48:12-35.1 permits the taking if the railroad establishes that the reasonable needs of its business demand acquisition of the property; 2) federal law does not preempt the provision of N.J.S.A. 48:12-35.1 which requires the railroad to establish that "alternative property suitable for the specific proposed use" is not available "thorough on-site accommodation"; and 3) the property owner has the burden of proof on the issue under N.J.S.A. 48:3-17.7 as to whether the taking would cause it undue injury.  02-09-12  

MARGARET NORDSTROM VS. WILLIAM "HANK" LYON NEW JERSEY ELECTION LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION A-0291-11T1

MARGARET NORDSTROM VS. WILLIAM "HANK" LYON           NEW JERSEY ELECTION LAW ENFORCEMENT COMMISSION           A-0291-11T1 
     In this appeal of an election contest, we hold that the New Jersey Election Law Enforcement Commission has exclusive jurisdiction over allegations of reporting violations, and primary jurisdiction over allegations of excess contributions, under the New Jersey Campaign Contributions and Expenditures Reporting Act.  We reverse the Law Division's decision to nullify the results of the Morris County Republican primary election for Freeholder that was conducted in June 2011, which was based upon the court's mistaken exercise of jurisdiction. 
We also conclude that the court erroneously determined that certain voting irregularities had been sufficiently proven to warrant relief under the election contest statute  02-07-12  

MARGARET DUCEY VS. STEPHEN DUCEY A-1066-09T3

 MARGARET DUCEY VS. STEPHEN DUCEY           A-1066-09T3 
     Without addressing the parties' arguments on the merits of the substantive challenges to the amended final judgment of divorce (JOD) in this matrimonial matter, we are constrained to reverse, as we reject the procedure employed by the trial judge, who, after presiding over a fourteen-day trial, entered a final JOD advising the court's "underlying opinion will be sent shortly."  Several months later, when the trial judge released the reasoning for her prior determinations, the substantive provisions diverged significantly from those in the JOD and counsel was ordered to prepare an amended JOD.  Although the trial judge included factual findings for many of the conclusions set forth in the amended JOD, no explanation was given for the wholesale alteration of the initially ordered 
page2image19960
page2image20232
page2image20504
page2image20776
page2image21048
page2image21320
provisions in the JOD.  We reject any suggestion that the trial judge's actions in this regard fall within her reasoned discretion, as discussed in Lombardi v. Masso, 207 N.J. 517 (2011).  Accordingly we reverse and remand for a new trial before a different Family Part judge.  02-02-12 

CTC DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. VS. GMH AETC MANAGEMENT/DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL. A-3703-10T4

 CTC DEMOLITION COMPANY, INC. VS. GMH AETC           MANAGEMENT/DEVELOPMENT LLC, ET AL. 

A-3703-10T4

     In applying the first-filed rule of comity -- by which, absent special equities, the court that first acquires jurisdiction has precedence over another court later acquiring jurisdiction -- the court held that, in these circumstances, a demand for mediation or arbitration, alleged to be the contractually required form of dispute resolution, constituted the first-filed action.  As a result, the court held that the trial court was not required to defer to a later filed Pennsylvania suit, which sought a declaratory judgment regarding the applicability of mediation or arbitration. 01-27-12 

Willie C. Rowe, et al. v. Mazel Thirty, LLC, et al. (067237; A-95-10)

Willie C. Rowe, et al. v. Mazel Thirty, LLC, et al.           (067237; A-95-10) 
          The police officer stood in the shoes of a licensee to           whom the landowner owed a duty to warn of any           dangerous conditions of which the owner knew or had           reason to know and of which the officer was reasonably           unaware.  Because this record presented a genuine           issue of material fact regarding the officer’s           awareness of the dangerous condition, the grant of           summary judgment was a usurpation of the jury’s           function.  2-2-12