Brown v. City of Paterson
36 A.3d 1075
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div.2012Background
- Paterson appeals an August 8, 2011 trial court order granting a preliminary injunction to prevent Karen Brown from being terminated as a municipal court judge pending litigation.
- N.J.S.A. 2B:12-5 requires Assignment Judge consent to increase judgeships or appoint temporary judges; term for temporary judges may not exceed one year.
- Paterson sought to appoint Brown as a temporary judge; assignment judge approved increasing the number of judges and calendar sessions, implying authority for a permanent appointment.
- City adopted a resolution calling Brown a temporary judge; Brown claimed the resolution and consent authorized a permanent appointment to a three-year term.
- Trial court granted a preliminary injunction to preserve the status quo given concerns about judicial independence and potential retroactive effects on Brown’s tenure, with discovery forthcoming.
- This appeal discusses whether consent for appointment of an additional judge encompassed a permanent appointment and whether the injunction was proper to preserve the status quo.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did Assignment Judge consent authorize a permanent appointment? | Brown | Paterson | Consent contemplated permanent appointment |
| Does temporary appointment violate statutory terms if consent covers permanent appointment? | Brown | Paterson | Temporary appointment cannot override permanent authorization |
| Was the preliminary injunction appropriate to preserve the status quo? | Brown | Paterson | No abuse; status quo preserved pending merits |
Key Cases Cited
- Krieger v. Jersey City, 27 N.J. 535 (1958) (protects independence of municipal courts from political interference)
- Levine v. Mayor of City of Passaic, 233 N.J. Super. 559 (Law Div. 1988) (holdover and three-year term continuity; cannot retroactively alter terms)
- Waste Mgmt. v. Union County Utils. Auth., 399 N.J. Super. 508 (App. Div. 2008) (preserves status quo factors for preliminary injunctions)
- Crowe v. De Gioia, 90 N.J. 126 (1982) (framework for preliminary injunctions and likelihood of success)
- Amerada Hess Corp. v. Dir., Div. of Tax., 107 N.J. 307 (1987) (statutory interpretation; every word should have effect)
- State v. Garcia, 297 N.J. Super. 108 (Mun. Ct. 1996) (administrative control of municipal courts; vicinage assignment judges)