Noah Franzblau
How Judge Franzblau decides
Patterns drawn from this judge's own signed orders. Every observation links to the order it came from.
What persuades
On a statutory-interpretation question, he treats the Legislature's silence after a court decision -- amending the surrounding statute without addressing the specific issue -- as evidence the Legislature accepted the existing judicial interpretation, rather than as an open question.
“Judge Franzblau noted our observation in Warnig that the Legislature amended the AICRA in 2003, nearly a decade after the Court issued Ingersoll in 1994, and therefore the Legislature was aware the Court had interpreted the statute but did not address Med-Pay benefits... The judge found the legislative non-action supported the inference the Legislature accepted the Court's interpretation of the statute.”
In a contract dispute where both sides call the agreement unambiguous but disagree on its meaning, he looks past the bare text to the parties' actual prior course of dealing to resolve which reading is correct.
“the court noted that its interpretation of the 1999 Agreement was 'consistent with the parties' prior course of dealing in which the Township is entitled to connection fees for properties outside the Borough.'”
He enforces preclusion doctrines (res judicata, collateral estoppel, the entire controversy doctrine) strictly against a party re-litigating the same lease or contract dispute after an earlier final judgment, and will go further and label a precluded re-filing frivolous rather than merely dismiss it.
“Judge Franzblau also found that the complaint was frivolous under N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 and Rule 1:4-8(b)(1) and awarded defendants attorney's fees and costs.”
Procedural preferences
He requires a party to properly authenticate a document -- even one produced by the opponent in discovery -- before it can be read into evidence or relied on at trial; production in discovery alone does not establish admissibility.
“documents including the incident report may be provided in response to discovery demands but that does not mean that they are admissible during trial.”
He is willing to resolve a dispositive contract question live, on the first day of trial, by argument with the parties' consent, rather than insisting on a separate pretrial summary-judgment motion cycle.
“On the first day of trial, with the consent of all counsel, the court held argument on Double O's motion requesting summary judgment on its cross-claim for indemnification against Mt. Arlington.”
He holds litigants strictly to peremptory, no-adjournment trial dates and to the court's own written directions issued through eCourts; a party who fails to read the court's correspondence is not excused merely because counsel says he did not see it, particularly once a second notice repeats the point.
“the court rejects that it is excu[s]able neglect to not see two letters from the court, both of which advised... counsel of [d]efendant's obligation to arrange for the payment of transportation fees... it would not be compatible with reasonable prudence.”
Cautions
He will dismiss a claim with prejudice for failure to appear at a peremptory trial date and treats a party's own inaction (e.g., not arranging or paying for a needed accommodation) as voluntary absence, not excusable neglect, even where incarceration is the underlying practical obstacle.
“Defendant's failure to appear at trial was not due to an exigent or unforeseeable circumstance... That defendant and his counsel were not attuned to this issue defies credulity.”
In a personal-injury trial he excludes evidence of a defendant's post-incident remedial measures (mopping, warning signage) even when a plaintiff argues it shows the hazard existed, applying the subsequent-remedial-measures rule strictly.
“the mopping and the pictures with... the signage around it... was not the condition of the floor at the time of the accident.”
In a multi-claim employment suit with an arbitration agreement, he was willing to split the case -- sending non-sexual-harassment claims to arbitration while keeping only the sexual-harassment claims in court -- an approach the Appellate Division later reversed in a published opinion, holding that a single viable sexual-harassment claim exempts the ENTIRE case from arbitration under the federal EFAA, not just the related claims.
“The court permitted her LAD claims to proceed in the Law Division but severed the rest for prosecution in an arbitral forum and rejected her later application for reconsideration.”
Signed rulings
A grounded sample of orders signed by this judge, with the verbatim dispositive language.
“On October 23, 2023, Judge Noah Franzblau issued two written decisions granting Progressive's motions for summary judgment... Med-Pay subrogation is prohibited by New Jersey law and not subject to arbitration under the Agreement.”
“A November 3, 2023 order denied Allstate's motion in aid of litigant's rights as moot.”
“In a cogent, well-reasoned opinion, Judge Franzblau determined that the Township was entitled to the connection fees, thus granting their motion for summary judgment and denying the Borough's motion for summary judgment.”
“On December 1, 2023, after considering counsel's arguments and written submissions, the judge denied the motion... 'Allowing evidence... that defendant[] mopped the floor and/or placed caution signs in the lobby would violate Rule 407.'”
“On February 5, 2024, the court granted summary judgment to plaintiff, granting enforcement on the Note, dismissing defendant's claims against her, and granting her application for attorney fees.”
“The court also granted partial summary judgment for the third-party defendants, dismissing all counts against them except defendant's claim for contribution.”
“The court denied defendant's cross-motion for summary judgment.”
“On February 26, 2024, defendant moved for reconsideration of those decisions. The court denied the motion on March 15, 2024.”
“On April 26, 2024, the court entered an order denying the motion to reinstate supported by a written opinion. It found: 'Defendant's failure to appear at trial was not due to an exigent or unforeseeable circumstance... That defendant and his counsel were not attuned to this issue defies credulity.'”
“On June 7, the court entered an order denying the motion supported by a written opinion. It held the motion was procedurally deficient and denied it substantively for the reasons set forth in the April 26 order.”
“The trial court found 'the clear and unambiguous language within... section four of the indemnity, which is supplemented by paragraph two, to reflect the parties' intentions' that Mt. Arlington is required to indemnify Double O for claims arising from its own negligence and granted Double O's motion for summary judgment.”
“The court permitted her LAD claims to proceed in the Law Division but severed the rest for prosecution in an arbitral forum and rejected her later application for reconsideration.”
“The court also denied defendants' motion to dismiss plaintiff's LAD sexual harassment claim as time barred, a decision they challenge by way of a cross-appeal... We agree, however, with both courts' decision that, through the indulgent lens of a Rule 4:6-2(e) application, as pled plaintiffs' LAD-based sexual harassment claims are not time-barred.”
“PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT/CROSS-RESPONDENT'S BRIEF IN SUPPORT OF HER APPEAL FROM THE SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY FOR MORRIS COUNTY LAW DIVISION'S (HON. NOAH FRANZBLAU, J.S.C.) SEPTEMBER 23, 2024 ORDER COMPELLING ARBITRATION IN PART AND NOVEMBER 8, 2024 ORDER DENYING RECONSIDERATION”
“On December 20, 2024, in a ten-page written opinion, Judge Noah Franzblau granted summary judgment in favor of defendants, holding that, in light of the prior judgment, plaintiff's action was barred by res judicata, collateral estoppel, and the entire controversy doctrine.”
“Judge Franzblau also found that the complaint was frivolous under N.J.S.A. 2A:15-59.1 and Rule 1:4-8(b)(1) and awarded defendants attorney's fees and costs.”
Put Judge Franzblau's record to work
Ezel drafts and answers grounded in this exact profile: how Judge Franzblau actually rules, not a generic AI guess.
Opens in Ezel Pro. Every answer is grounded in Judge Franzblau's own signed orders and cites them.