Case Overview:

• The appellant, Gerald Sternberg, requested permission to file a reply factum for the upcoming appeal scheduled on April 29, 2024.
• The appellant argued that the respondent raised two new issues in its responding factum:
  1. The secondary argument about whether the matter is properly raised on the appeal.
  2. The applicability of the doctrine of merger.
• The respondent contended that these issues were not new and should have been anticipated by the appellant.

Court's Decision:

• The court determined that new issues were indeed raised by the respondent in their responding factum.
• The court granted the appellant permission to file a reply factum.
• The respondent is not permitted to file a sur-reply factum since they had the opportunity to address these issues in their responding factum.
• The decision on the costs of this motion is deferred to the panel hearing the appeal.

Key Points:

• A reply factum is not usually allowed without leave, but the court made an exception due to the new issues presented.
• The court aims to ensure that oral submissions are well-prepared and focused on the pertinent issues.
• This procedural ruling facilitates a more efficient and directed appeal hearing.

The document does not provide explicit information about the successful party or the total monetary award ordered.