Services / Appellate Practice Group - Individual Overview
Virtually all litigated cases leave one party dissatisfied with the outcome, whether it is a judge's decision on a motion or a verdict after trial. Whether you find yourself on the winning or losing side of the result, the Appellate Practice Group at Lomurro, Davison, Eastman & Munoz, P.A. can assist you. The appellate process is unique. It requires attorneys and support staff experienced in the intricacies of the practice to ensure that your appeal is handled in a skillful and cost-effective manner. Regardless of the nature of your appellate issue, we have the knowledge and the resources to guide you through all aspects of the appeal. In appellate practice, lower court decisions are reviewed by a higher court. For the most part, appeals are determined based upon the record of what took place in the lower court, and no new evidence is considered. Appellate judges evaluate and decide matters primarily upon written briefs and also may hear oral argument.
Our Appellate Practice Group is designed to place our clients in the best position to prevail on appeal. Collectively, our appellate attorneys have over 60 years of experience in virtually every field of substantive law, including commercial and corporate litigation, administrative law, criminal defense, real property and environmental litigation, matrimonial and DYFS matters, personal injury, and probate actions. Our background and experience in all facets of the appellate process and our commitment to excellence in the practice of law make the Appellate Practice Group of Lomurro, Davison, Eastman & Muñoz, P.A. a wise choice to represent you on appeal.
The following are some of our Group's more recent significant decisions: In re Opinion 710 of the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics, 193 N.J. 419 (2008), we served as counsel to the New Jersey State Bar Association in its petition to the Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics regarding the ethical obligations of counsel for purchases and seller in real estate transactions. In Panetta v. Equity One, 190 N.J. 307 (2007) we were instrumental in obtaining an opinion that clarified the law regarding ownership of waterfront property. In Shotmeyer v. New Jersey Realty, 195 N.J. 72 (2007), we represented the interests of major insurers in the State helping to limit the exposure of insurers in cases where property has been transferred by the insured. In Division of Youth and Family Services v. J.L. and T.L. In the Matter of O.L., a Minor, 400 N.J.Super. 454 (App. Div. 2008), we successfully upheld the trial court's finding of no abuse or neglect against the child's mother and modified the burden-shifting approach in certain DYFS actions. In the Matter of Consider Distribution of the Casino Simulcasting Special Fund, 398 N.J.Super. 7 (App. Div. 2008), we vindicated and expanded the rights of administrative due process and open government for New Jersey's horse racing community. In State v. Thompson, 2008 WL 2938070 (App. Div. 2008), the Appellate Division affirmed the trial court's dismissal of thirty counts of an indictment charging several defendants with official misconduct relating to providing and receiving certain personal benefits.