Just last month, New Jersey’s Appellate Division, in Daniels v. Hollister Co., held that “ascertainability” should not be considered as a factor by New Jersey trial courts when deciding whether to certify a class action.
Blog
Preventable medical mistakes are the third leading cause of death in the United States, right after heart disease and cancer. Generally, doctors are all very smart, dedicated to their patients, hardworking, and have a deep down commitment to helping others.
At trial, attorneys sometimes want the jury to hear about reports and conclusions of treating doctors without actually having those treating doctors come to court to testify.
Both New Jersey and New York have laws in place to protect the rights of people who suffer losses as a result of the negligent service of alcoholic beverages by bars while at the same time providing a reasonable procedure for allocating responsibility for such losses.
This week, in Maida v. Kuskin, the New Jersey Supreme Court addressed an important aspect of civil reservations.
The New Jersey Supreme Court decided last week in the case of Renner v. AT&T that a Workers’ Compensation claimant is not entitled to compensation for a cardiovascular injury, disease or death, unless the claimant can show that the cardiovascular injury resulted from a work effort or strain involving a substantial condition or event. This case has broad ramifications for New Jersey workers who suffer injuries such as heart attacks or pulmonary embolisms at work and seek workers’ compensation benefits for those injuries.
In the recent Workers’ Compensation decision in Neglia v. Craft Carpentry & Drywall, a New Jersey Workers’ Compensation court held that a petitioner was not entitled to medical and temporary benefits where the Court determined that the petitioner purposely or knowingly made false or misleading statements in claiming compensation benefits.