Debra Ann Lombardi, Plaintiff-Respondent v. Christopher J. Masso, John M. Torrence, Mtg Properties, LLC, Jennifer…

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey affirmed the Appellate Division’s judgment that the trial judge was within his discretion to vacate a previously granted interlocutory summary judgment and that the original grant was erroneous because genuine issues of material fact existed. The Court held that the law of the case doctrine does not bar such reconsideration and that procedural defects in the plaintiff’s appeal filing do not preclude review. The decision also reaffirmed the broad inherent power of trial courts to revise interlocutory orders under Rule 4:42-2. Justice Rivera‑Soto dissented, arguing that summary judgment must be decided solely on the original record and that the majority improperly relied on post‑judgment evidence.