Two juvenile plaintiffs instituted an action against a group of psychologists, alleging injuries as a result of being held in isolation for significant periods of time while in the custody of the New Jersey Juvenile Justice Commission. At issue was whether the Court should have granted the medical defendants’ motion to dismiss the Complaint as plaintiffs did not serve Affidavits of Merit in accordance with N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-26 to -29.
However, the Court held that the Affidavit of Merit Statute did not apply in the current action as, pursuant to the Appellate Division decision in Saunders v. Capital Health System at Mercer, 398 N.J. Super. 500 (App. Div. 2008), an Affidavit of Merit only need be produced if the defendant is listed as a licensed person under N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-26. Therefore, because psychologists are not listed in the statute as licensed persons for which an Affidavit is required, the Court, in a June 20, 2013 decision, denied medical defendants’ motion to dismiss the Complaint.
- De Laroche v. Advanced Laparoscopic Association et al. (A-5403-1474) Decided 2/28/2017
- Clarification on the Statute of Limitations for “Survival” Claims – Warren v. Muenzen, 448 N.J. Super. 52, (Super. Ct. App. Div. 2016) December 7, 2016)
- Settling Defendant Charge Need Not Always Be Given – Hernandez v. Chekenian, No. L-11038 14, 2016 WL 6024008, (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. July 15, 2016)
- Vascular Surgeon Not Qualified to Testify Against Family Practitioner Who Performed a Vascular Procedure – Afonso v. Bejjani – A-1623-15T4
- Federally Qualified Health Center Entitled to New Jersey’s Cap on Charitable Immunity for Hospitals – S.M. v. United States of America – CA No. 13-5702, USDC – DNJ