Keith E. Lynott
How Judge Lynott rules, drawn from 16 signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
About Judge Lynott
Keith E. Lynott is a judge of the Superior Court of New Jersey in the Essex Vicinage, where he serves on temporary recall. He joined the court in January 2017 after a career in environmental law at McCarter & English. A state Supreme Court order recalled him to judicial service in April 2026.
Judge Lynott's practices and standing orders
The court's website lists no individual practices or standing orders of Judge Lynott's own (checked October 11, 2026), so the court's local rules and general orders are the place to look (court page ↗).
Standing orders for every case in this court
Orders the court applies to all of its cases, whichever judge has them, as published on the court's website (checked October 11, 2026).
How Judge Lynott decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
In Xela's contract dispute, Lynott held that the written agreement's integration clause superseded a claimed earlier oral promise of a 0.5% equity interest, whether or not that promise had existed.
“The integration clause negates any basis or need for, right to, or utility of a trial as to the disputed facts concerning whether the 0.5% Oral Agreement ever existed, as the BDA incontrovertibly superseded any such agreement.”
In Dun & Bradstreet v. Tropare, Lynott granted partial summary judgment on contract breach after finding the company’s internal videos established the breach. He expressly left causation and damages for trial.
“It finds the motion record, even when examined in D&B's favor, establishes conclusively a breach of contract by D&B. That said, and for the avoidance of any doubt, the Court emphasizes that it renders no determination at this time that such breach caused any injury or damages to Tropare or its business.”
In Hopkins Group Management's real estate dispute, Lynott denied both sides' partial summary judgment motions on fraud and consumer-fraud claims because the record presented factual disputes for trial.
“For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies both motions. In each case, it finds that the motion record, properly examined under the applicable standard for motions for summary judgment, presents genuine disputes of material fact warranting a trial.”
In Lowenstein Sandler's fee dispute with Harmony Foundation, Lynott consolidated Harmony's later Bergen County action with Lowenstein's Essex County action, citing common issues and the risk of inconsistent outcomes.
“Considerations of efficiency, sound judicial management, judicial economy and, in particular, avoidance of inconsistent outcomes warrant the exercise of discretion to grant the relief.”
Procedural preferences
In Dun & Bradstreet v. Tropare, Lynott reviewed reconsideration of his interlocutory summary judgment order de novo and denied the request.
“Accordingly, the Court has examined the motion for reconsideration de novo to determine if reconsideration - vacating the prior Order - serves the interest of justice.”
In Same Day Procedures, Lynott dismissed three counts against Viant without prejudice to repleading and denied the defendants' remaining dismissal motions.
“For these reasons, the Court grants the motion of Viant and dismisses the claims as to Viant in the Fourth, Sixth and Seventh Counts without prejudice to the right to re-plead if desired as to any or all such Counts to address the deficiencies noted herein. The Court otherwise denies the Defendants’ motions.”
In Same Day Procedures, Lynott appointed a Special Discovery Master because the case's complexity made frequent discovery applications likely.
“The Court concludes independently that the circumstances of this CBLP case warrant the appointment of a Special Discovery Master in light of the complexity of the issues and the likely need for frequent consideration of discovery-related applications from both sides as the case proceeds.”
Cautions
In Xela's contract dispute, Lynott awarded fees and costs after the plaintiffs failed to produce a complete recording despite a court order. He held that the sanction did not require a finding of willfulness.
“Although this Court has rarely granted such applications for sanctions and has examined this application carefully and through a skeptical prism, it is constrained in the circumstances presented to grant the application.”
In Lowenstein Sandler's action against former client Harmony Foundation, Lynott dismissed the firm's fee claims without prejudice because it had not sent the required fee-arbitration notice.
“The Court found that, as Lowenstein had not provided such a notice, it was not permitted to pursue an action against its former client at that time.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“Crown's application for an award of attorneys' fees and costs after trial is hereby GRANTED... The Court awards Crown attorneys' fees in the amount of $88,707.00 and costs in the amount of $5,666.19... The Court enters Judgment in favor of Crown and against F.M. Renaissance in the amount of $94,373.19.”
“The Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment is DENIED.”
“Accordingly, for these reasons, the Court also denies the Defendants' cross-motion for partial summary judgment.”
“ORDERED that Tropare's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be and hereby is GRANTED... ENTERED AGAINST D&B on Count I of Tropare's Second Amended Counterclaim, declaring that D&B breached its contractual obligations to Tropare... the Court emphasizes that it renders no determination at this time that such breach caused any injury or damages to Tropare.”
“ORDERED that D&B's Motion for Reconsideration be and hereby is DENIED... There is no claim lodged in this application that the Court overlooked facts that bear on the issues presented for decision.”
“ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Plaintiff's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby GRANTED... it is hereby declared and adjudged that the Zhuhai Defendants are not and have never been members of Ge Lab Cosmetics LLC.”
“Accordingly, the separate motion seeking to dismiss the Counterclaim due to discovery violations is moot.”
“The Court grants the motion to vacate the Orders appointing the SFA with the understanding, as represented by counsel, that the designated SFAs... have been fully paid for all services heretofore performed. There is no longer a need for such services.”
“The Court, also for the reasons set forth herein, grants the motion to amend to interpose a Third Amended Complaint.”
“ORDERED that the Joint Motion is GRANTED in its entirety... judgment is hereby entered in favor of Defendants dismissing with prejudice (i) plaintiff Alexander M. Cardoso's claim for breach of the Alleged Oral Agreement and (ii) the First Count of the Verified Complaint to the extent it encompasses Cardoso's claim for breach of the Alleged Oral Agreement.”
“The Joint Motion is GRANTED. Pursuant to Rule 4:23-2(b) and this Court's inherent authority, defendants... are awarded, and plaintiffs... shall pay, the reasonable attorney's fees and expenses incurred by Defendants that were caused by Plaintiffs' failure to obey the Court's Order Compelling Discovery entered March 29, 2019.”
“Delta's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED.”
“Delta's Motion for Summary Judgment is hereby DENIED... For the reasons set forth herein, the Court denies the motion for summary judgment.”
“It generally denies the motions in limine, though it finds certain aspects of such motions are unopposed and thus granted.”
“That Delta's Motion for Judgment Notwithstanding the Verdict is DENIED.”
“That Delta's Motion for New Trial is WITHDRAWN.”
“Lowenstein's motion is hereby GRANTED; The Harmony Action is transferred from Bergen County to Essex County and consolidated with the Lowenstein Action; The consolidated action is assigned to the CBLP.”
“ORDERED that Defendants' Cross-Motion is and shall hereby be DENIED.”
“ORDERED that the Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Counts One and Two of the Complaint and Amended Complaint is and shall hereby be GRANTED in part... DISMISSED without prejudice, subject to service by Lowenstein upon Harmony of a Pre-Action Notice... Count Four is and shall hereby be DISMISSED without prejudice as to Defendant Wilen.”
“ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF LEAVE TO FILE AN AMENDED COMPLAINT”
“ORDERED that Plaintiff SDP's Motion be and is hereby GRANTED in part as set forth in the attached Statement of Reasons.”
Draft for Judge Lynott with the record in hand
Ezel grounds your drafting and research in this profile: what has persuaded Judge Lynott, and what has not, cited to the signed orders.
Opens in Ezel Pro.
- Grounded in Judge Lynott's own signed orders
- Cites every source it relies on, so you can verify it
- Chat, drafting and research in one workspace