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

Monday, March 14, 2016

WOLVERINE FLAGSHIP FUND TRADING LIMITED, ET AL. VS. AMERICAN ORIENTAL BIOENGINEERING, INC., ET AL. A-0654-14T1

 WOLVERINE FLAGSHIP FUND TRADING LIMITED, ET AL. VS. AMERICAN ORIENTAL BIOENGINEERING, INC., ET AL. 
A-0654-14T1 

Plaintiffs argue that the Chancery Division incorrectly interpreted Uniform Commercial Code 8-112, as adopted by this state at N.J.S.A. 12A:8-112, to require actual seizure of certificated shares owned by a debtor before a creditor can reach the debtor's interest in those shares. Having reviewed the arguments in light of the applicable law, we affirm the order of the Chancery Division. 

IN THE MATTER OF COUNTY OF ATLANTIC AND PBA LOCAL 243 AND FOP LODGE 34 AND PBA LOCAL 77/ IN THE MATTER OF TOWNSHIP OF BRIDGEWATER AND PBA LOCAL 174 A-2477-13T4/A-0107-14T1

IN THE MATTER OF COUNTY OF ATLANTIC AND PBA LOCAL 243 AND FOP LODGE 34 AND PBA LOCAL 77/ IN THE MATTER OF TOWNSHIP OF BRIDGEWATER AND PBA LOCAL 174 
A-2477-13T4/A-0107-14T1 

The Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) abandoned its long-standing dynamic status quo doctrine in an appeal by FOP Lodge 34 and PBA Local 77 alleging unfair practice charges against Atlantic County, thus reversing a hearing examiner's award in favor of the public employees. In reliance on that decision, PERC dismissed Local 174's grievance against Bridgewater Township. PERC held that Atlantic County's failure to pay salary increments during the period of an expired collective bargaining agreement (CNA) was not an unfair labor practice. In the Bridgewater appeal, PERC held that the issue of automatic salary increments after the expiration of a CNA was neither mandatorily negotiable nor legally arbitrable and dismissed the grievance. We reversed, concluding that PERC's abrupt change in adjudicative doctrine was action in conflict with its legislative mandate, which is the implementation of the New Jersey Employer-Employee Relations Act, N.J.S.A. 34:13A-1 to -39. 

J.P. VS. GREGORY J. SMITH, ET AL. A-0055-15T1

J.P. VS. GREGORY J. SMITH, ET AL. 
A-0055-15T1 
This case involves claims of sexual abuse brought by plaintiff J.P. against defendants Southern Regional High School and Southern Regional School Board (collectively, "the School"). In her complaint, filed in September 2014, plaintiff alleged that, in 2004, she was subjected to repeated sexual abuse by the School's assistant band director, defendant Gregory Smith. The acts of abuse allegedly occurred (1) at the School, where plaintiff was a student; (2) during two School-organized overnight trips; and (3) in plaintiff's home. Plaintiff sought damages pursuant to the Child Sexual Abuse Act (CSAA), N.J.S.A. 2A:61B-1, and under various common law theories of tort liability. 
The CSAA's definition of passive sexual abuse limits the class of persons who are potentially liable to those who are "within the household." Distinguishing Hardwicke v. American Boychoir School, 188 N.J. 69 (2006), we conclude that the School, a public day school, is not liable as a passive abuser under the CSAA because it does not fit within that statutory definition. Accordingly, we affirm the dismissal of plaintiff's CSAA claim against the School. 

We further conclude that plaintiff's common law claims accrued no later than July 2013, when plaintiff's expert opined that she fully understood she had been abused and the consequences of that abuse. Hence, no Lopez hearing is necessary to determine the date the common law claims accrued. Those claims are in turn barred due to plaintiff's failure to comply with the notice provisions of the Tort Claims Act. We therefore reverse that portion of the order under review that reinstated the common law claims and ordered a Lopez hearing.