Romagnola v. Gillespie, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• applying the 2010 amendments to Rule 3:22-4(a), barring claims not previously raised, to a defendant's PCR petition filed in 2008
• explaining that “ ‘the relaxation provision [of Rule 1:1-2] should be sparingly resorted to, particularly when a reasonable interpretation of the complex of directly applicable rules meets the problem at hand’ ” (quoting Pressler, Current N.J. Court, Rides, cmt. 2 to Rule 1:1-2 (2007))

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).