36-2-1575 Cokerline v. Clark, App. Div. (Simonelli, J.A.D.) (28 pp.)
One of the many issues that is of import to plaintiffs in this case is the fact that the judge precluded the plaintiff’s expert from testifying on the theory of causation regarding defendant’s UPS truck pushing a car into decedent in a manner that caused him to fall from an overpass. The trial judge made a mistake when it barred plaintiff’s expert’s supplemental report as an inadmissible net opinion. The appellate court found there was enough evidence for an expert to rely upon that decedent was in front of the car when the UPS truck allegedly struck it, even though some of the testimony by a witness did not place him there. The judge made a mistake when he directed a verdict in defendants’ favor prior to the new trial and dismissed the complaint. The appellate panel reverses the judge’s grant of involuntary dismissal and bar of the expert’s supplemental report. The factual records is everything in these cases!!
Legal Developments
That Affect You
-
2022 changes to New Jersey statute N.J.S.A. 45:1-15.9.
This memorandum addresses the scope of New Jersey statute N.J.S.A. 45:1-15.9,summarizes the 2022 amendments to that statute, identifies the effective date andapplicability of those amendments, and outlines practical implications forregulated professionals and licensing boards. Background N.J.S.A. 45:1-15.9 is part of New Jersey’s professional and occupational licensinglaws administered under Title 45. The statute governs disciplinary and…