Opinion

REGINA NAGLE v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. ROSEMARY MCCOY v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES, ETC. (STATE POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM) (CONSOLIDATED)

Court
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Filed
Feb 11, 2022
Status
Unpublished
Cited by
0 cases
Authority
More cited than 6.7%

The opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the

internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NOS. A-2758-19

A-3887-19

REGINA NAGLE,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, STATE

POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM,

Respondent-Respondent.

_____________________________

ROSEMARY MCCOY,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v.

BOARD OF TRUSTEES, STATE

POLICE RETIREMENT SYSTEM,

Respondent-Respondent.

_____________________________

Submitted November 29, 2021 – Decided February 11, 2022

Before Judges Fasciale and Sumners.

On appeal from the Board of Trustees of the State

Police Retirement System, Department of Treasury,

Docket Nos. xx-3425 and xx-3426.

Lauren Sandy, attorney for appellants.

Andrew J. Bruck, Acting Attorney General, attorney

for respondent (Melissa H. Raksa, Assistant Attorney

General, of counsel; Christopher Meyer, Deputy

Attorney General, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

In these consolidated appeals, the parties having filed a stipulation of

dismissal. We must point out appellants' counsel notified the court on January

21, 2022, that this matter was being dismissed because respondent issued a

final agency decision on July 29, 2022, which reconsidered and granted the

relief appellants requested due to newly enacted legislation. Unbeknownst to

the court, that decision was rendered four months before we considered the

appeal on November 29, 2021. While we appreciate counsel's representation

that there were administrative issues in implementing the decision, she had a

responsibility to alert the court of the probable resolution to avoid unnecessary

waste of judicial resources. See Sessner v. Merck Sharp & Dohme Corp., 435

N.J. Super. 347 (App. Div. 2014). In fact, our decision in this appeal was

scheduled to be released on January 24, 2022, but was pulled upon notification

of the dismissal.

A-2758-19

2

Dismissed with prejudice and without costs.

A-2758-19

3

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.