Notable Wins

View OTHER BLOGS

Notable Win: No Cause Finding by EEOC in Matter Alleging Disability Discrimination

Client: The Arc of Cape May County, Inc. 

Federal Agency: United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Attorney: Ralph R. Smith, 3rd, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Brady v. Arc of Cape May, Inc. 

Claimant, a direct support professional, brought a claim in the EEOC against our client alleging wrongful termination due to disability and age.

After review of the facts, the EEOC issued a no probable cause finding in our client’s favor.

Notable Win: Suspension of Teaching Certificate for Failure to Provide Notice of Resignation

Client: Hope Community Charter School 

Court: Office of Administrative Law

Trial Attorney: Joseph Betley, Esq.

Brief Attorneys: Stacey Gorin, Esq. and  Lindsay Romeo, Esq. 

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

In the Matter of the Suspension of the Teaching Certificate of T.A.

The Commissioner of Education issued a final decision and found a teacher breached an employment contract and failed to provide sixty days’ notice prior to her resignation.

Summary decision was granted to petitioner, Hope Community Charter School, and T.A.’s teaching certificates are suspended for a period of one year.

Notable Win: Conditional Use Approval Granted for Cannabis Business In Burlington County

Client: Starlight Cannabis, LLC 

Court/Entity: Wrightstown Land Use Board

Attorney: Alan P. Fox, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

In August 2025, the Wrightstown Land Use Board granted our client, Starlight Cannabis, LLC (“client” or “applicant”), conditional use approval for a cultivation facility, as well as site plan approval with c (2) bulk variances, including a variance from the buffer requirement along the northern property line, the parking requirements, and the height of proposed sound wall around the HVAC equipment. At the Land Use Board hearing, the Applicant offered testimony in support of the application by a civil engineer, professional planner, cannabis consultant, acoustic engineer and a representative explaining the proposed cannabis cultivation operation and security systems. This team effort led to a unanimous vote of approval by the Land Use Board.

The proposed cannabis cultivation business is a permitted conditional use in accordance with Section 53-2(b) the Code of the Borough of Wrightstown. The Applicant proposes to operate the cannabis cultivation business exclusively indoors in the existing Building with a closed loop air filtration system. The Applicant proposes no growing or other cultivation activities outside the facility and all cannabis products will be stored inside the Building. Any cannabis waste will be removed by a green waste disposal operator in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. The Applicant proposes to operate the cannabis cultivation business from 10:00 am to 6:00 pm, 7 days per week. However, shipping, delivery and distribution will be limited to 8:00 am to 5:00 pm as required under Section 53-7(e) of the Code of the Borough of Wrightstown.

The Applicant proposes an exterior enclosed mechanical area at the Property for six proposed HVAC units and 1 fluid cooling system. The enclosure was designed by the acoustic engineer and architect to buffer any noise to meet the local noise ordinance. The Applicant engaged a security consultant to design and install the appropriate security systems, alarms and cameras necessary to operate the proposed cannabis cultivation business. The Applicant proposes scheduled deliveries to eliminate any traffic issues and for security purposes.

The New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance and Marketplace Modernization Act, N.J.S.A. 24:61-31 et seq. (the “Personal Use Act”) legalizes the cannabis cultivation business in New Jersey. The New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory Commission conditionally approved the Applicant’s application for a state license related to the operation of class #1 cannabis cultivation business at the Property.

Notable Win: Major Site Plan Approved for Construction Equipment Sales and Leasing Business in Burlington County

Client: Earthborne, Inc.

Court/Entity: Burlington City Joint Land Use Board

Attorney: Alan P. Fox, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

In July 2025  the Joint Land Use Board for the City of Burlington granted  the application filed by our client – 204 246 Route 130, LLC – for a Preliminary and Final Major Site Plan with bulk variances and waivers for the property located at 204 and 246 W. Route 130 North, Burlington City, New Jersey (the “Property”) for the following project: The site is suitable for the approved and proposed dealership to be operated by Earthborne, which primarily sells large equipment to support construction and landscaping and related equipment( “Proposed Use”). The City of Burlington Joint Land Use Board/Zoning Board previously granted the Applicant’s prior application for a use variance for the Proposed Use at a public meeting held on June 26, 2024 and a memorializing Resolution adopted on August 28, 2024.

The Proposed Use will be a lower intensive use than the previous car dealership, with lower traffic generated. Most equipment will be delivered to the Applicant’s customer’s site, with some assembling proposed at the Property. All major repairs will be performed at the applicant’s PA location, with proposed customary and normal repairs at the Property. Most sales are proposed to be performed remotely. Generally, customers schedule appointments for any live visits. The hours of operations that would not conflict with the enjoyment of the adjacent residential uses to the south.

Notable Win: Car Dealership Wins Prerogative Writ Action Against Township to Expand Parking Lot

Client: Foulke Management Corp. and Lenny Reality, LLC

Court: Camden County Superior Court

Trial Attorney: Laura D. Ruccolo, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Lenny Reality, LLC et al. v. Cherry Hill Township et al.

Summary judgment was granted in favor of Foulke Management Corp. and Lenny Reality, LLC (hereinafter “plaintiffs”) in a Prerogative Writ Action finding that Cherry Hill Township acted arbitrarily, capriciously and unreasonably in rescinding zoning permits related to the Planning Boards approval of Cherry Hill Dodge located off Route 70 West to expand its parking lot.

The matter arose out of a law suit brought by the plaintiffs against the Township of Cherry Hill after it rescinded zoning permits related to the Township’s Planning Board approval for Cherry Hill Dodge to tear down two homes and to expand the Cherry Hill Dodge parking lot after neighbors made unsubstantiated complaints that the conditions of approval had been violated by Cherry Hill Dodge.

Notable Win: Court Rules in Favor of Respondent on Petitioner’s Motion for Medical Treatment and Temporary Disability Benefits

Client: Liberty Mutual Insurance 

Court: Workers’ Compensation

Trial/Brief Attorney: Jason Sikoryak, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Tracie Eustache v. New Jersey Transit

On May 25, 2023, Petitioner sustained a compensable injury to her left hand and thumb as a result of a window crushing her hand. Respondent initially accepted this claim and petitioner was treated with stitches to the left thumb and a splint for the left hand to prevent mobilization. Petitioner was instructed by medical providers to remove the splint to wash her hands and when performing range of motion exercises at home. Respondent scheduled Petitioner for evaluations with Dr. Lipschultz and Dr. Chan to treat the left hand, but Petitioner failed to comply with either treating physician. Further evaluations were not scheduled by Respondent.

Petitioner did not seek medical treatment until over four months later when she was examined by Dr. Wagner. Dr. Wagner reported that Petitioner’s original injuries healed, but she had since developed atrophy in the muscles of her hand, warranting additional treatment. Through testimony, it was revealed that Petitioner did not comply with the instructions from medical providers and was instead continuously wearing the hand splint for several months. Ultimately, the Court did not find the Petitioner to be credible and found that her current injury was due to her own intentional intervening actions and therefore, not compensable. Petitioner’s Motion for Medical Treatment and Temporary Disability Benefits was therefore denied.

Notable Win: Defense No Cause Verdict Found in Construction Accident Resulting in Personal Injury

Client: Vin-Rick Builders, LLC

Court: Essex County Superior Court

Trial Attorney: Christopher J. Hoare, Esq.

Brief Attorney: Nuo Jiang, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Guerini v. Vin-Rick Builders and Hutch Grove Enterprises, et al.

Plumber (47 yrs. old) fell from unguarded stairs while carrying a bathtub suffering significant lumbar and cervical disc herniations.  Plaintiff sued client Vin-Rick and co-defendant project owner-developer.  Plaintiff underwent four (4) spine operations and fusions.  Motion for Summary Judgment was denied due to factual issue as to which defendant was acting as the de facto general contractor on the project as of date of accident.  Client Vin-Rick’s owner was deceased prior to his deposition.

Defense presented circumstantial evidence at trial which proved to the jury that the co-defendant Hutch Grove Enterprises was acting as the de facto general contractor as of date of accident.  See: Costa v. Gaccione, 408 N.J. Super. 362 (App. Div. 2009). Elements of control by general contractor include: hiring sub contractors, purchasing material, paying for permits, and supervising of sub-contractors.  After 45 minutes, the jury returned a verdict of no-cause in favor of Vin-Rick Builders, LLC and awarded Plaintiff $1.8M against codefendant Hutch Grove Enterprises.

Notable Win: Acquisition of Company

Client: Delaware Valley Floral Group, LLC

Attorneys: William G. Wright, Esq. and Charles A. Rizzi, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Delaware Valley Floral Group, LLC acquisition of Ziegler & Sons, Inc.

The firm represented Delaware Valley Floral Group, LLC, the largest wholesale florist distributer in the country, in the purchase of  Zieger & Sons, Inc who has offices in Philadelphia and Harrisburg, PA. This is the 17th acquisition of a wholesale florist by DVFG, all in the northeast region of the US. The firm represented DVFG in each of the acquisitions.

Notable Win: Third Circuit Affirms Summary Judgment Victory on Fourth Amendment Claims Against Local Police Department

Client: Township of Hamilton and several police officers

Court: US Court of Appeals, Third Circuit

Brief Attorney: Charles Holmgren, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Saintil v. Borough of Carteret, et al.

In the course of an investigation into a homicide and after obtaining a search warrant from a local magistrate, outside law enforcement contacted the Hamilton Police Department for assistance in detaining Ronald Saintil, a person of interest in their investigation. Outside law enforcement had advised the Hamilton PD of the search warrant and that Saintil had refused to answer his door or phone and had attempted to flee his home. The Hamilton PD activated their SWAT Team who breached Saintil’s door, and quickly detained him. After being cleared in the homicide investigation, Saintil filed suit in the District of New Jersey against various law enforcement defendants,  including Hamilton Township and 16 Hamilton police officers, alleging a violation of his Fourth Amendment rights against an illegal search and seizure and the excessive use of force.

Following a successful summary judgment dismissal in the lower court and Saintil’s appeal, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit affirmed the Hamilton Defendants’ dismissal. The Court found that the Hamilton Defendants’ reliance on an apparently valid search warrant was reasonable to support their legal search and seizure and, considering the totality of the circumstances (including the fact that it was in the course of a murder investigation, the possibility that Saintil was armed and dangerous, and they understood there was a valid search warrant), the Hamilton Defendants’ use of the SWAT Team to detain Saintil was an objectively reasonable use of force.

Notable Win: Denial of Petitioner’s Motion for Medical and Temporary Benefits

Client: Lowe’s 

Court: Workers’ Compensation

Trial/Brief Attorney: Michelle L. Duffield, Esq.

**Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances**

Matter Caption: Magalies Velez v. Lowe’s 

Petitioner filed a Motion for Medical and Temporary Benefits seeking treatment for her back and alleged hernia.  Respondent denied any need for treatment based on expert reports from Dr. William Mitchell in connection with petitioner’s back allegations and Dr. Adam Sobel in connection with petitioner’s hernia allegations.  Petitioner relied on her expert, Dr. David Weiss, as he found Petitioner was in need of treatment for both her back and hernia. After a full Trial with testimony from all three experts, the Judge found Respondent’s experts to be more credible and questioned the veracity of the petitioner as she had failed to disclose a prior thoracic spine condition along with degenerative joint disease and a prior diagnosis of fibromyalgia.

Capehart Blogs

Firm News
Capehart Scatchard Attorneys Selected For Inclusion in Best Lawyers In America® Lists
Litigation Blog
No Liability to Property Owner for Subcontractor’s Fall Through Roof on Which He Worked
Duty of Care
Plaintiff’s Personal Injury Lawsuit Against Trampoline Park Dismissed Due to Lack of Expert Testimony As to Duty of Care Owed by Facility

No Liability to Property Owner for Subcontractor’s Fall Through Roof on Which He Worked

Plaintiff’s Personal Injury Lawsuit Against Trampoline Park Dismissed Due to Lack of Expert Testimony As to Duty of Care Owed by Facility

Appellate Division Upholds Trial Court’s Use of an Evidentiary Hearing to Dismiss Late Tort Claims Notice on Public Entity

Subscribe to Blog Updates

Categories

Tags
Alternative Energy Alternative Energy - Solar Alternative Energy - Wind Appellate Division automobile accident automobile insurance Burlington County Bar Association Cannabis Law Charity constructive notice coverage data privacy discovery dismissal Diversity & Inclusion Committee duty of care employees employers Employment Law evidence insurance Liability Litigation Litigation Quarterly Lorman Millennium Seminars NBI negligence New Jersey Workers' Compensation Act New York Law NJ Law notice Pennsylvania Law personal injury premises liability Public Entity Newsletter Real Estate and Land Use school law slip and fall statute of limitations summary judgment Tort Claims Act trip and fall Workers' Compensation Workers' Compensation Newsletter