SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-3686-18T2

BEN GROSS,1

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

ROBERT CORMACK,

Defendant-Respondent.

_________________________

Submitted May 13, 2020 – Decided June 2, 2020

Before Judges Mayer and Enright. 

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law 

Division, Monmouth County, Docket No. L-4698-14.

Ben Gross, appellant pro se.

Respondent has not filed a brief.

PER CURIAM

1

 Referenced in the record also as Bezalel Grossberger.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE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.
2

A-3686-18T2

Self-represented plaintiff Ben Gross appeals from an April 9, 2019 order 

entered by Judge Lisa P. Thornton, A.J.S.C., denying his motion to reinstate a

complaint. We affirm, substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge Thornton's 

order. 

We briefly summarize the facts. Defendant Robert Cormack, an attorney 

licensed to practice law in New Jersey, represented a client who sued plaintiff

in an action in Ocean County (Ocean County action). After defendant's client 

prevailed in the Ocean County action, plaintiff filed suit against defendant in 

Monmouth County (Monmouth County action), claiming defendant made 

defamatory statements about him in the Ocean County action and tortiously 

interfered with plaintiff collecting damages against defendant's client. On 

February 20, 2015, Judge Dennis R. O'Brien granted defendant's motion to 

dismiss plaintiff's case with prejudice.

On June 1, 2015, plaintiff moved to reinstate his complaint and for leave 

to amend. On June 26, 2015, Judge O'Brien denied plaintiff's motion and the 

case remained dismissed with prejudice. On July 1, 2015, plaintiff filed another 

motion seeking a "declaration of legal relations," repeating arguments 

previously raised and rejected in the February 20, 2015 order. Judge O'Brien 
3

A-3686-18T2

viewed plaintiff's motion as a motion for "reconsideration of the denial of a prior 

motion for reconsideration" and denied the application on July 24, 2015. 

On January 14, 2019, plaintiff submitted pleadings to Judge Thornton for 

her review, pursuant to her December 1, 2017 order.2 Plaintiff sought to 

reinstate the Monmouth County action against defendant. On April 9, 2019, 

Judge Thornton denied his application, stating "a review of the pleadings 

indicate[s] this filing is designed to perpetuate the pattern of frivolous litigation 

plaintiff has engaged in on prior matters." In her opinion, Judge Thornton 

specifically referenced Judge O'Brien's February 10, 2015 and July 24, 2015 

orders. Additionally, she noted plaintiff's motion for reinstatement did "not 

comply with the requirements of any New Jersey Court Rule, more specifically 

[Rule]4:50." 

On appeal, plaintiff advances no fewer than fifteen legal arguments 

seeking reversal of Judge Thornton's April 9, 2019 order. His arguments are 

devoid of merit and do not warrant discussion in a written opinion. R. 2:11-

3(e)(1)(E). 

2

 Judge Thornton's December 1, 2017 order required plaintiff's filings to be 

presented to her before being accepted for filing. 
4

A-3686-18T2

"[C]ourts have the inherent authority, if not the obligation, to control the 

filing of frivolous motions and to curtail 'harassing and vexatious litigation.'" 

Zehl v. City of Elizabeth Bd. of Educ., 426 N.J. Super. 129, 139 (App. Div. 

2012) (quoting Rosenblum v. Borough of Closter, 333 N.J. Super. 385, 387, 391

(App. Div. 2000)). We have held "an Assignment judge can prevent the filing 

of a complaint, or issuance of a summons thereon, when the plaintiff's prior 

litigation demonstrates a pattern of frivolous pleadings." Rosenblum, 333 N.J. 

Super. at 387. 

Guided by these principles, we perceive no basis to disturb Judge 

Thornton's well-reasoned opinion.

Affirmed.