The Appellate Division of state Superior Court on Friday denied a request by the state to issue a stay on the appeal regarding the pension contributions case involving Judge Paul DePascale.
The court cited the Crowe case law in its reasoning, and said it “compels a denial of the state’s motion.
“The issue now before our State’s highest court is whether such a violation has occurred here, an issue that the Court will resolve in its ultimate decision,” the court said. “The motion for a stay is denied.”
The state Supreme Court has agreed to take on the case, and Superior Court today decided there is no overriding reason why its ruling in favor of DePascale and other judges must be set aside pending the appeal.
The court, in denying the request for a stay, said that it disagrees with the state’s contention that there is no threat to an independent judiciary at issue here.
It said in its decision that “an independent judiciary is imperiled by any violation” of the state Constitution, which DePascale said would occur if the pension/benefits overhaul as it pertains to judges is allowed to stand.