Greg Noren v. Heartland Payment Systems, Inc., 156 A.3d 188

Plaintiff Greg Noren appealed and defendant Heartland Payment Systems cross-appealed from the Law Division's handling of a summary judgment motion in a contract/dispute case.
On initial appeal, this Court dismissed Heartland’s cross-appeal for failing to comply with Rule 2:6-1(a)(1) by not including the items submitted to the trial court on the summary judgment motion or a statement of those items.
Heartland moved for reconsideration, arguing the Rule applies only to appeals "from a summary judgment" (i.e., where summary judgment was granted), not to appeals from denials of summary judgment.
The core dispute was statutory/interpretive: whether the appendix requirement covers appeals from any disposition of a summary judgment motion (grant, denial, or partial grant/denial).
The Court denied reconsideration, reasoning the Rule must be read to cover appeals from the disposition of a summary judgment motion so appellate review is limited to the original summary judgment record.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether Rule 2:6-1(a)(1) requires an appellant to include in the appendix all items submitted to the trial court on a summary judgment motion when appealing a denial of summary judgment	Noren argued compliance with the Rule is required to define the original summary judgment record for appellate review	Heartland argued the Rule’s phrase "from a summary judgment" applies only to appeals from grants of summary judgment, not denials, so its omission should not be fatal	The Court held the Rule applies to appeals from the disposition of a summary judgment motion (grant, denial, or partial), and denied reconsideration of the prior dismissal for noncompliance

Guiseppi v. Walling, 144 F.2d 608 (2d Cir.) (concurring opinion quoted on literal reading pitfalls)
Gemsco, Inc. v. Walling, 324 U.S. 244 (U.S. Supreme Court) (affirming related procedural discussion)
McNeil v. Legislative Apportionment Comm'n, 177 N.J. 364 (N.J. 2003) (on statutory/constitutional text interpretation and avoiding literal misreadings)
Lombardi v. Masso, 207 N.J. 517 (N.J. 2011) (appellate review limited to the original summary judgment record)
Bilotti v. Accurate Forming Corp., 39 N.J. 184 (N.J. 1963) (review of summary judgment limited to the case as it unfolded to that point)
Rios v. Szivos, 354 N.J. Super. 578 (App. Div. 2002) (discussed rule application in footnote; court here declines Heartland’s reading)