I ATTORNEY / LAW FIRM / PRO SE LITIGANT

Transcription

1 New Jersey Judiciary SUPERIORCOURT- ApPELLATE DIVISION NOTlCE OF CROSS APPEAL Type of print all information. Attach additional sheets if I ATTORNEY / LAW FIRM / PRO SE LITIGANT necessary. TITLE IN FULL (AS CAPTIONED BELOW) ATTORNEY OF RECORD John A. Hartmann, I", NAME David Perry Davis, Esq. Plaintiff-appellant respondent vs. Richard W. Olsson, Defendant-respondent appellant / cross / cross STREETADDRESS 112 W Franklin Ave CITY STATE ZIP PHONE NUMBER Pennington NJ (609) ADDRESS dpd@farnilylawnj.pro ON CROSS-APPEALFROM TRIAL COURTJUDGE TRIAL COURTOR STATEAGENCY TRIALCOURTOR AGENCYNUMBER Hon. Douglas H. Mercer MER-L Hurd, P.J.Ch.Div. I Hon. William Mercer MER-L Anklowitz, JSC Notice is hereby given that Defendant cross-appeals to the appellate division from the ( ) judgment (X) orders entered _12/20/2013 (prejudgment 1 interlocutory) and 10/14/2015 in the _X_ Civil decision Criminal or Family Part of the Superior Court or from a _ State Agency If not appealing the entire judgment, order or agency decision, specify what parts or paragraphs are being appealed: Pre-trial motion seeking dismissal of suit based on litigation privilege, portion of trial decision seeking same relief. Have all issues, as to all parties in this action, before the trial court or agency been disposed of? (In consolidated actions, all issues as to all parties in all actions must have been disposed of.) ~ Yes_ No If not, has the order been properly certified as final pursuant to R. 4:42-2? Not applicable

2 Notice of cross appeal and attached case information statement have been served where applicable on the following: Name Date of Service Trial Court Judge Hon. William Anklowitz, JSC 12/22/2015 Hon. Douglas H. Hurd, PJ.ChDiv. Trial Court Division Manager David Smolowitz Name and Designation Attorney Name, Address and Telephone No. Date of Service Lydia Fabbro Keephart, Esq. Lydia Fabbro Keephart, Esq. 12/22/15 Pellettieri Rabstein & Altman Pellettieri Rabstein & Altman Attorney for plaintiff 100 Nassau Park Blvd Suite 111 Princeton NJ Voice: Fax: Attached transcript request form has been served where applicable on the following: Name Date of Service Trial Court Transcript Office N/A RESPONDENT AS TO 10/14/15 DECISION N/A TRANSCRIPT IN POSSESSION AS TO 12/20/2013 DECISION Court Reporter N/A N/A Supervisor of Court Reporters N/A N/A Clerk of the Tax Court N/A N/A State Agency N/A NIA Exempt from submitting the transcript request form due to the following: _X_ Transcript in possession of attorney or pro se litigant (four copies of the transcript must be submitted along with an electronic copy). AS PER ABOVE List the date(s) of the trial or hearing: 10/14/2015 I certify that the foregoing statements are true to the best of my knowledge, information and belief. I also certify that, unless exempt, the filing fee required by N.J.S.A. 22A:2 has been paid. I~ /z f /Z()(Y' DATE I

3 .; -, New Jersey Judiciary SUPERIOR COURT - ApPELLATE DIVISION CIVIL CASE INFORMATION STATEMENT TITLE IN FULL TRIAL COURT OR AGENCY DOCKET NUMBER John A. Hartmann, III, MER-L Plaintiff-appellant respondent I cross VS. Richard W. Olsson, Defendant-respondent appellant I cross APPELLANT'S ATTORNEY ADDRESS LKEEPHART@PRALAW.COM X Plaintiff Defendant Other (Specify) NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE CLIENT Pellettieri Rabstein & 100 Nassau Park Blvd plaintiff Altman Suite 111 Lydia Fabbro Keephart Princeton NJ RESPONDENT'S ATTORNEY: ADDRESS DPD@FAMILYLAWNJ.PRO Plaintiff ~ Defendant.: Other (Specify) NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE CLIENT David Perry Davis, Esq 112 West Franklin Ave defendant Pennington NJ GIVE DATE AND SUMMARY OF JUDGEMENT, ORDER OR DECISION BEING CROSS-APPEALED AND ATTACH A COpy: 12/20/ PRETRIAL MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED. 10/14/ RENEWED MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED. 10/14/ No CAUSE VERDICT ENTERED BY TRIAL COURT ON MERITS. Are there any claims against any party below, either in this or a consolidated action, which have not been disposed of, including counterclaims, cross-claims, third-party claims and applications for counsel fees? Caveat: Defendant served notice that he intended to pursue sanctions for frivolous litigation. He intends to pursue that claim if a reversal is entered on the counter-claim. Yes _X _No

4 If so, has the order been properly certified as final pursuant to R. 4:42-2? (If not, leave to cross-appeal must be sought R. 2:2-4,2:5-6) N/A (If the order has been certified, attach, together with a copy of the order, a copy of the complaint or any other relevant pleadings and a brief explanation as to why the order qualified for certification pursuant to R. 4:42-2.) Were any claims dismissed without prejudice? If so, explain and indicate any agreement between the parties concerning future disposition of those claims. Yes _X_ No Is the validity of a statute, regulation, executive order, franchise or constitutional provision of this State being questioned? (R. 2:5-1 (h))._- - -._ Yes _X_ No GIVE A BRIEF STATEMENT OF THE FACTS AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY: ATTORNEY-PLAINTIFF FILED A COMPLAINT ALLEGING DEFAMATION AS A RESULT OF STATEMENTS DEFENDANT MADE IMPUGNING THE INTEGRITY OF PLAINTIFF IN PLEADINGS AND LETTERS TO THE COURT IN CONNECTION WITH A POST-JUDGMENT MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF A DIVORCE DECISION. THE TRIAL COURT DENIED A PREJUDGMENT MOTION TO DISMISS THE MATTER ON LITIGATION PRIVILEGE. THE CASE WAS TRIED. DEFENDANT RENEWED HIS MOTION TO DISMISS BASED ON LITIGATION PRIVILEGE. TRIAL COURT DENIED DEFENDANT'S MOTION AND A NO-CAUSE VERDICT ENTERED ON THE MERITS. PLAINTIFF APPEALS THE TRIAL DECISION. DEFENDANT CROSS- APPEALS THE DENIAL OF THE APPLICATION TO DISMISS BASED ON LITIGATION PRIVILEGE. TO THE EXTENT POSSIBLE, LIST THE PROPOSED ISSUES TO BE RAISED ON THIS CROSS-APPEAL, AS THEY WILL BE DESCRIBED IN APPROPRIATE POINT HEADINGS PURSUANT TO R. 2:6-2(A)(5). (Appellant or cross appellant only). I. Judge Hurd erred in denying defendant's application to dismiss the complaint based on litigation privilege. II. Judge Anklowitz erred in denying defendant's renewed application to dismiss the complaint based on litigation privilege at the end of the trial. III. Such other points as research and preparation of the respondent / cross-appellant's brief may reveal.

5 IF YOU ARE CROSS-APPEALING FROM A JUDGMENT ENTERED BY A TRIAL JUDGE SITTING WITHOUT A JURY OR FROM AN ORDER OF THE TRIAL COURT, COMPLETE THE FOLLOWING: 1. Did the trial judge issue oral findings or an opinion? If so, on what date? -X_ Yes No - 12/20,2013, 10/14/ Did the trial judge issue written findings or an opinion? If so, on what date? X Yes No /20,2013, 10/14/ Will the trial judge be filing a statement or an opinion pursuant to R. 2:5-1 (b)? Unknown - not requested by either counsel. Caution: Before you indicate that there was neither findings nor an opinion, you should inquire of the trial judge to determine whether findings or an opinion was placed on the record out of counsel's presence or whether the judge will be filing a statement or opinion pursuant to R. 2:5-1 (b). DATE OF YOUR INQUIRY: IS THERE ANY CROSS-APPEAL NOW PENDING OR ABOUT TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THIS COURT WHICH: (A) Arises from substantially the same case or controversy as this cross-appeal? - Yes X_ No - (B) Involves an issue that is substantially the same, similar or related to an issue in this Yes X_ No - - cross-appeal? 2. WAS THERE ANY PRIOR Cross-appeal INVOLVING THIS CASE OR Yes X No CONTROVERSY? IF THE ANSWER TO EITHER 1 OR 2 ABOVE IS YES, STATE: Case name: Appellate division docket number: - - Civil cross-appeals are screened for submission to the Civil Cross-appeals Settlement Program (CASP) to determine their potential for settlement or, in the alternative, a simplification of the Issues and any other matters that may aid in the disposition or handling of the cross-appeal. Please consider these when responding to the following question. A negative response will Not necessarily rule out the scheduling of a preargument conference. State whether you think this case may benefit from a CASP conference. No Explain your answer. A negative response will Not necessarily rule out the scheduling of a preargument conference. This is not a matter of damages or other relief that would be subject to resolution; it is a clear issue of law. The parties attended pre-trial mediation with Hon. Philip Carchman, JAD (ret) which was unsuccessful. I certify that confidential personal identifiers have been redacted from documents Now submitted to the court, and will be redacted from all documents submitted in the future in accordance with Rule 1:38-7(b). Name of Cross-Appellant or Respondent Name of Counsel of Record Richard W. Olsson David Perry Davis, Esq. l/vyki?rl / Da<e