Pursuant to N.J.S. 2C:58-3d, which governs New Jersey firearm permit appeals, “No formal pleading and no filing fee shall be required as a preliminary to such hearing.” (Emphasis added.)
Despite the above, over the last year, New Jersey’s county courts have been requiring a $50 filing fee “made payable to the Treasurer State of New Jersey” from people wishing to appeal their police chiefs’ denials of firearm permit applications. The firm of Evan F. Nappen Attorney at Law PC immediately began challenging this practice. However, such matters often take months to finally come to a hearing. On October 18, 2016, the Nappen Firm completed a case in Ocean County that included this challenge, regarding which the judge agreed and ordered “that the applicant shall be reimbursed the $50.00 filing fee.” Louis P. Nappen, Esq., who handled the matter for the Firm, stated, ‘“No filing fee’ means ‘no filing fee.’ The law could not be clearer. I applaud the judge for correctly applying the law in this regard.” The Order was served and, this past week, the Treasury of New Jersey issued the appellant his refund. (As pictured, above.) “$50 may not seem like a lot,” Nappen continued, “but consider that there are thousands of permit appeals. That money adds up.” In 1971, in the case Weston v. State, the New Jersey Supreme Court explained: "The function of the Police Chief as the local administrative official charged with responsibility for the original decision to grant or withhold the firearms purchaser identification card involves largely the exercise of an informal discretion…. So viewed, it follows that the basic justice aimed at by the Legislature in expressly providing for judicial review, can be achieved fairly only by a de novo hearing in the County Court.… Such a judicial review compensates constitutionally for procedural deficiencies before the administrative official." In 2010, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the right to keep arms is a fundamental, individual constitutional right belonging to all U.S. citizens. In this regard, Evan F. Nappen, Esq., stated, “Denial of one’s constitutional rights should not be a cash-cow for the State and something that can be arbitrarily increased to discourage people from exercising the right to keep and bear arms.”
4 Comments
5/19/2018 08:23:21 am
Anything that is of no use or proven to be unnecessary should be refunded. If it's an extra cost on the part of any party with real losses, then it should be refunded. It's too much insult to injury already if they don't do that. Do they still need to get a court order about this? Aren't they supposed to do this from their own will? Life is really unfair I guess. We should not take things seriously though because we could get sick from too much worrying and magnifying of things we should rather be ignoring.
Reply
10/21/2018 09:00:18 am
I am very happy to discover your post as it will become on top in my collection of favorite blogs to visit.
Reply
11/22/2018 02:40:13 am
I got what you mean , thanks for posting .Woh I am happy to find this website through google.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWelcome to our law firm blog. At Evan F. Nappen Attorney At Law PC, we are dedicated to protecting our clients' rights. Archives
March 2017
Categories |