NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
|
|
- Allyson Caldwell
- 8 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. JANICE TAYLOR, as Administratrix of the Estate of Deborah Conroy, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, Cross-Respondent, COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER, SAINT BARNABAS HEALTH CARE SYSTEMS, DANNA GLORE MICHELLE DELA CRUZ, M.D., DEBORAH WINN-VAN HISE, APN-C, and Defendants-Respondents/ Cross-Appellants, OCEAN HEALTH INITIATIVES, and Defendant-Respondent, CVS CAREMARK CORP. and PHARMACISTS FOR CVS PHARMACY, Defendants. Argued October 27, Decided January 21, 2011 Before Judges R. B. Coleman and Lihotz.
2 PER CURIAM On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex County, Docket No. L Michael A. Spero argued the cause for appellant/cross-respondent (Sterns & Weinroth, P.C., attorneys; Mr. Spero, of counsel and on the briefs; Christina Vassiliou Harvey, on the briefs). Lauren H. Zalepka argued the cause for respondents/cross-appellants Community Medical Center, St. Barnabas Health Care Systems and Danna Glore Michelle Dela Cruz, M.D. (Ronan, Tuzzio & Giannone, attorneys; Ms. Zalepka, of counsel and on the briefs). Julianne Cefalu argued the cause for respondent/cross-appellant Deborah Winn-Van Hise, APN-C (Reiseman, Rosenberg, Jacobs & Heller, P.C., attorneys; Sam Rosenberg, of counsel; Ms. Cefalu, on the briefs). John J. Bannan argued the cause for respondent Ocean Health Initiatives (Reynolds & Drake, P.C., attorneys; Mr. Bannan, of counsel and on the brief). In this medical malpractice matter, plaintiff Janice Taylor, the Administratrix of the Estate of Deborah Conroy, challenges the dismissal of her complaint for failure to properly comply with the Affidavit of Merit statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 and the subsequent order denying reconsideration. Defendants St. Barnabas Health Care Systems and Community Medical Center (collectively the Community defendants), Danna Glore Michelle Dela Cruz, M.D. and Deborah Winn-Van Hise, APN-C, 2
3 have filed a defensive cross-appeal, challenging the qualifications of plaintiff's putative affiant. As in other matters, we again "grappled with the derelictions" of plaintiff's counsel, who may have "filed [a] well-grounded complaint[], but [] neglected to file [a] technically correct or timely affidavit[]." Ferreira v. Rancocas Orthopedic Assocs., 178 N.J. 144, 146 (2003). Following our review, we affirm. Plaintiff commenced a wrongful death action against defendants Dr. Dela Cruz, Ocean Health Initiatives (Ocean Health), Winn-Van Hise, the Community defendants, and CVS Caremark Corp., seeking damages as a result of alleged professional negligence in prescribing medications to decedent, which caused her death on November 16, In part, plaintiff's claims were based on the Ocean County Medical Examiner's report following an autopsy of decedent, which concluded the cause of death was "[c]ardio respiratory failure[,] which resulted from a combination of prescription drug reaction[,] severe pulmonary fibrosis and desquamative changes." Decedent had been a patient of the Community defendants and Ocean Health for years before her death and Dr. Dela Cruz and Winn-Van Hise prescribed numerous medications when treating decedent. Plaintiff alleged Dr. Dela Cruz and Winn-Van Hise were negligent in "their supervision and care" of decedent 3
4 "in writing prescriptions and the use of same" as "decedent was prescribed approximately 3,380 pills" in Further, plaintiff asserted Ocean Health and the Community defendants breached the standard of "care, monitoring and dispensing of medication." Prior to a case management conference held in compliance with Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at 147, plaintiff moved for additional time to file an affidavit of merit as required by N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27. The motion was granted. On June 25, 2008, to support the viability of the claims of medical malpractice, plaintiff submitted a four paragraph "affidavit" of Charles J.F. McHugh, M.D. Dr. McHugh stated he was a licensed medical doctor for more than twenty years and had "been board certified in the area of emergency medicine" since After a review of decedent's medical records, Dr. McHugh opined, "there exists a reasonable probability that the care, skill and knowledge exercised and exhibited in the care and treatment provided by the physicians and staff identified in the complaint in this matter fell below acceptable professional standards." The document was neither notarized nor conforming to the requisites of R. 1:4-4(b). It is not clear whether a 4
5 case management conference was held after plaintiff's submission. 1 Defendants filed a series of letters and motions challenging Dr. McHugh's affidavit. On July 22, 2008, Winn-Van Hise sent plaintiff a letter asserting Dr. McHugh s "Affidavit of Merit was legally insufficient." The correspondence did not elaborate on that assertion. On July 28, 2008, the Community defendants filed a motion to dismiss the complaint, arguing the affidavit failed to "meet the statutory criteria to offer an Affidavit of Merit against a physician Board Certified in Internal Medicine, such as Dr. [Dela Cruz]" because Dr. McHugh was a specialist in emergency medicine. The motion was denied. On August 21, 2008, Ocean Health sent correspondence to plaintiff challenging the propriety of Dr. McHugh s affidavit "on the grounds that Dr. McHugh is not a registered professional nurse, such as [] Winn-Van Hise, and the [a]ffidavit is not notarized nor does it comply with N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41." On October 2, 2008, the Community defendants filed a second motion to dismiss the complaint because of the failure to provide an affidavit of merit. That motion was also denied because the court saw "no reason to rule that [a] board 1 We repeat our admonition to trial courts that the purpose of conducting a timely Ferreira case management conference is to address the possible flaws of an affidavit of merit. 5
6 certified emergency room doctor would not be able to certify that there is merit to the claim being asserted by [] plaintiff." Discovery commenced. The court granted Ocean Health's motion to dismiss the complaint for plaintiff's failure to provide answers to interrogatories and supplemental interrogatories, or respond to its request for a statement of damages and notices to produce documents. The motion was granted. By consent, dismissal was vacated on February 3, On January 16, 2009, Winn-Van Hise moved to dismiss the complaint because "plaintiffs ha[d] failed to serve an appropriate and sufficient [affidavit of merit] as to Winn-Van Hise." Ocean Health filed a cross-motion to dismiss the complaint, relying on Winn-Van Hise's arguments. While these motions were pending, plaintiff amended Dr. McHugh's affidavit. The amended affidavit was substantially similar to the original, except it now contained the statement "sworn and subscribed before me this 10th day of February, 2009" along with plaintiff's counsel's signature. The trial court's order granting the motion, stated: It is [o]rdered that [Winn-Van Hise's] motion is denied as concerns the alleged insufficient qualifications and experience of the purported affiant, Dr. McHugh; and it is further Ordered that plaintiff's complaint be and hereby is dismissed with 6
7 prejudice as to [Winn-Van Hise and Ocean Health] based on the [c]ourt's finding that Dr. McHugh's purported Affidavit of Merit is defective in form, and plaintiffs are out of time to correct the defect[.] In its statement of reasons, the court explained the complaint was dismissed "because no proper affidavit of merit has been filed with [the trial court] by the plaintiff's attorney." The court found the amended affidavit of merit was "still deficient because it [did] not comply with the [certification] requirements of [Rule 1:4-4(b)]" 2 and was "not filed in a timely manner even" if it had not been deficient. "If in fact the oath was taken on February 10[, 2009] it [was] beyond the period of time allowed by... the affidavit of merit statute. Way beyond the additional extension of time that this [c]ourt granted of 60 days to have that affidavit filed." A second order, which dismissed the complaint against the Community defendants and Dr. Dela Cruz was filed for the same reasons. The court denied plaintiff's motion for reconsideration. This appeal ensued. Plaintiff argues she should be permitted to proceed with her professional negligence action because she has substantially 2 Pursuant to Rule 1:4-4(b), a certification in lieu of an oath required by an affidavit must contain the statement "I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment." 7
8 complied with the statutory requirements of N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 and has corrected the error. Further, she maintains defendants have not been prejudiced and had "abandoned the issue of the allegedly defective affidavit," implicating equitable estoppel and laches. We reject these contentions. Our review of plaintiff's arguments requires an understanding of the provisions and purpose of the Affidavit of Merit statute. N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 states: In any action for damages for... wrongful death... resulting from an alleged act of malpractice or negligence by a licensed person in his profession or occupation, the plaintiff shall, within 60 days following the date of filing of the answer to the complaint by the defendant, provide each defendant with an affidavit of an appropriate licensed person that there exists a reasonable probability that the care, skill or knowledge exercised or exhibited in the treatment, practice or work that is the subject of the complaint, fell outside acceptable professional or occupational standards or treatment practices. The court may grant no more than one additional period, not to exceed 60 days, to file the affidavit pursuant to this section, upon a finding of good cause. In the case of an action for medical malpractice, the person executing the affidavit shall meet the requirements of a person who provides expert testimony or executes an affidavit as set forth in section 7 of P.L. 2004, c. 17 [N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41]. In all other cases, the person executing the affidavit shall be licensed in this or any other state; have particular expertise in the general area or specialty 8
9 involved in the action, as evidenced by board certification or by devotion of the person's practice substantially to the general area or specialty involved in the action for a period of at least five years. The person shall have no financial interest in the outcome of the case under review, but this prohibition shall not exclude the person from being an expert witness in the case. The statute "was one of five bills passed as part of a 1995 tort reform package designed to strike a fair balance between... weed[ing] out frivolous lawsuits early in the litigation while, at the same time, ensuring that plaintiffs with meritorious claims will have their day in court." Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at (internal quotations and citations omitted). The statute "requires a plaintiff in a malpractice action to serve on a defendant within 120 days of receipt of the answer an expert s sworn statement attesting that there exists a 'reasonable probability' that the professional s conduct fell below acceptable standards." Id. at 146. The failure to serve a complying affidavit as required is "tantamount to the failure to state a cause of action, subjecting the complaint to dismissal with prejudice." 3 Id. at 150 (citing N.J.S.A. 2A:53A- 3 In Alan J. Cornblatt, P.A. v. Barrow, 153 N.J. 218, 247 (1998), the Court concluded "a dismissal under the statute based on a violation of the affidavit requirement would be without prejudice only if there are extraordinary circumstances. Absent (continued) 9
10 29); Palanque v. Lambert-Woolley, 168 N.J. 398, 404 (2001). Recognizing "the harshness of a rigid application of the statute," the Court has, in certain circumstances, "fashioned equitable remedies" when the statutory requirement for the affidavit of merit may be deemed to have been met. Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at 147; Cornblatt, supra, 153 N.J. at 240. "A complaint will not be dismissed if the plaintiff can show that he has substantially complied with the statute." Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at 151. Thus, the Court has determined the balance of equities requires technical defects to be overlooked in favor of proceeding with a plaintiff's valid claim. Cornblatt, supra, 153 N.J. at 239. Plaintiff's position asks us to overlook the procedural and substantive statutory requirements because she believes her claims are meritorious and defendants have failed to assert prejudice. Although we agree no evidence is offered that defendants were prejudiced by the defective affidavit of merit, nevertheless, this is not the test. The unequivocal provisions of the statute place an affirmative obligation upon a plaintiff, seeking to present a malpractice action, to adhere to the requirements to effectuate (continued) extraordinary circumstances, a failure to comply with the statute that requires a dismissal would be with prejudice." 10
11 the statute's purpose. We do not agree that the lack of a jurat, or certification language in lieu thereof, may be ignored. The absence of the oath or affirmation is not a technical flaw, but a defect that strikes at the heart of the statutory requirement, which recognizes the need for the solemnity of the truth. See Tunia v. St. Francis Hosp., 363 N.J. Super. 301, 306 (App. Div. 2003) (holding "the failure to place a declarant under oath" was not a "technical deficiency" but "goes to the very nature of what an affidavit is"), certif. denied, 179 N.J. 311 (2004). Plaintiff alternatively suggests the Court has found substantial compliance where a plaintiff submitted unsworn expert reports. See Galik v. Clara Maass Med. Center, 167 N.J. 341, (2001). By analogy, she maintains Dr. McHugh's unsworn statement suffices. This argument is rejected. In Galik, supra, the plaintiff moved for an extension of time to file the affidavit of merit, "on the ground that the expert report, in unsworn form, had not only been served on defendants' carriers prior to the filing of suit, but was the basis of ongoing settlement negotiations" and the affidavit was filed eighteen days late. 167 N.J. at 351. Those additional facts directed the Court's conclusion that good cause for the late filing had been established. 11
12 Here, Dr. McHugh's unsworn statement provides no detail of the basis for his stated conclusion; the statement includes only a threshold showing that the claims asserted are meritorious. Moreover, the record reveals limited discovery was exchanged and no expert reports were provided. Thus, defendants have not been sufficiently informed of the basis of Dr. McHugh's statement. Based on these facts, any delay in providing a proper affidavit of merit was not occasioned by settlement negotiations based on plaintiff's proofs as was found in Galik. Plaintiff's claim of "oversight" undermines the statutory requirements and is insufficient to ignore the glaring deficiency. We find it important that plaintiff was aware of the omission of the jurat in Dr. McHugh's statement. She should have recognized and corrected the defect on August 21, 2008, when Ocean Health sent correspondence challenging the propriety of Dr. McHugh s affidavit "on the grounds that Dr. McHugh is not a registered professional nurse, such as [] Winn-Van Hise, and the [a]ffidavit is not notarized nor does it comply with N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41." The record is devoid of efforts to correct the identified flaw. Similarly, plaintiff offers no explanation of why strict compliance was ignored. Counsel's inadvertence or inattention is insufficient to qualify as extraordinary circumstances to 12
13 prevent application of the statute. Stoecker v. Echevarria, 408 N.J. Super. 597, 612 (App. Div.), certif. denied, 200 N.J. 549 (2009); see also Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at 152 (stating "attorney inadvertence is not such a circumstance entitling plaintiff to a remedy of dismissal of a complaint without prejudice"). Plaintiff additionally asserts that the amended document satisfies the statutory requisites. We disagree. As noted by the motion judge, the amended document remains flawed because it does not comport with the requirements of an affidavit, 4 which include that the officer administering the oath, the affiant and the paper, "be present at the same time" and "'there must be something done which amounts to the administration of an oath.'" Tunia, supra, 363 N.J. Super. at 306 (App. Div. 2003) (quoting In re Educ. Ass'n of Passaic, Inc., 117 N.J. Super. 255, 267 (1971)). Neither document references that Dr. McHugh signed the statements after being placed under oath. Therefore, the statements lack a recognition of the necessity for truthfulness and the penalties for perjury. 4 Neither document executed by Dr. McHugh contained the necessary language delineated in Rule 1:4-4(b) to be considered a certification, which is, "I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment." 13
14 We also reject as without merit plaintiff's additional arguments asserting the equities in the matter favor allowing the litigation to proceed. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). We note defendants actively moved to challenge plaintiff's statutory compliance, albeit on different grounds. The fact that defendants' motions were unsuccessful and discovery commenced cannot excuse plaintiff's failure to meet her obligations. See Stoecker, supra, 408 N.J. Super. at (reviewing similar circumstances finding the defendant did not sit back and mislead the plaintiff to believe defendant accepted the claims as viable). The requirements imposed by the statute are exceedingly clear and not "overly burdensome obligations." Ferreira, supra, 178 N.J. at 146. Plaintiff was noticed of the statutory noncompliance and did not react. We concur with the motion judge that plaintiff's failure to file a "proper affidavit within the statutory time period requires a dismissal of the complaint with prejudice." Id. at (citing Cornblatt, supra, 153 N.J. at 242). Based on our determination, we need not address the crossappeals. Affirmed. 14
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-2495-14T2 MELODY FAITH MAZUR, as ATTORNEY- IN-FACT for DORIS ELIZABETH ARMSTRONG,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. FABIO VERGARA, deceased, by the Administratrix of his Estate, Blanca Cardona,
More information2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U. No. 1-14-1985 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 141985-U No. 1-14-1985 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1).
More informationDecided: March 27, 2015. S14G0919. GALA et al. v. FISHER et al. This Court granted a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals in Fisher
In the Supreme Court of Georgia Decided: March 27, 2015 S14G0919. GALA et al. v. FISHER et al. HINES, Presiding Justice. This Court granted a writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals in Fisher v. Gala,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
JOHN S. PATTERSON and STELLA PATTERSON, Individually and as Joint Tenants, v. NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Plaintiffs-Respondents, LADENBURG THALMANN & CO. INC., Defendant-Appellant.
More informationIn the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District
In the Missouri Court of Appeals Western District STEVE AUSTIN, Appellant, v. JOHN SCHIRO, M.D., Respondent. WD78085 OPINION FILED: May 26, 2015 Appeal from the Circuit Court of Clinton County, Missouri
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION BRUCE W. VAN SAUN and KATHLEEN W. VAN SAUN, his wife, ATLEE C. VAN SAUN, EMILY C. VAN SAUN and MILES W. VAN SAUN, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants/
More informationATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE
ATTORNEY HELP CENTER: MEDICAL MALPRACTICE The healthcare industry has exploded over the last thirty years. Combined with an increasing elderly population, thanks to the Baby Boomer generation, the general
More informationTAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY. May 1, 2012
TAX COURT OF NEW JERSEY 153 Halsey Street CHRISTINE M. NUGENT Gibraltar Building - 8 TH Floor JUDGE Newark, New Jersey 07101 (973) 648 2098 Fax: (973) 648-2149 Henry LaCap, Esq. Crossroads Corporate Center
More informationIN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-IA-00181-SCT
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-IA-00181-SCT VICKSBURG HEALTHCARE, LLC d/b/a RIVER REGION HEALTH SYSTEM v. CLARA DEES DATE OF JUDGMENT: 01/22/2013 TRIAL JUDGE: HON. ISADORE W. PATRICK, JR.
More informationAny civil action exempt from arbitration by action of a presiding judge under ORS 36.405.
CHAPTER 13 Arbitration 13.010 APPLICATION OF CHAPTER (1) This UTCR chapter applies to arbitration under ORS 36.400 to 36.425 and Acts amendatory thereof but, except as therein provided, does not apply
More informationHOUSE BILL NO. HB0106. Medical malpractice-use of expert witnesses. A BILL. for. AN ACT relating to medical malpractice actions; providing
00 STATE OF WYOMING 0LSO-0 HOUSE BILL NO. HB0 Medical malpractice-use of expert witnesses. Sponsored by: Representative(s) Gingery A BILL for AN ACT relating to medical malpractice actions; providing for
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI NO. 2013-CA-01200-COA HARVEY HALEY APPELLANT v. ANNA JURGENSON, AGELESS REMEDIES FRANCHISING, LLC, AGELESS REMEDIES MEDICAL SKINCARE AND APOTHECARY AND
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE COMMITTEE ON OPINIONS TRENK DIPASQUALE, DELLA FERA & SODONO, P.C., Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant, vs. INDUSTRIAL URBAN CORP., ANTHONY FRISINA, LORI FRISINA,
More information2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U. Order filed September 23, 2013 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2013
NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e)(1). 2013 IL App (3d) 120130-U Order
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. KWABENA WADEER and OFELIA WADEER, v. Plaintiffs-Appellants, NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS
More informationIN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE NINTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, IN AND FOR ORANGE COUNTY, FLORIDA BARBRA R. JOYNER, Appellant, CASE NO.: 2012-CV-000003-A-O Lower Case No.: 2010-CC-010676-O v. ONE THOUSAND OAKS, INC.,
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. MICHAEL TAFFARO, and SCOTT TAFFARO, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, Plaintiff, JAMES
More informationCommonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals
RENDERED: MARCH 13, 2015; 10:00 A.M. NOT TO BE PUBLISHED Commonwealth of Kentucky Court of Appeals NO. 2014-CA-000056-MR RAMONA SPINKS, EXECUTRIX OF THE WILL OF BENJAMIN SPINKS, DECEASED APPELLANT APPEAL
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. ELI NEIMAN, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, USAA CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, and Defendant,
More informationCase 2:12-cv-07317-JLL-JAD Document 34 Filed 04/19/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 331
Failure Breach Case 2:12-cv-07317-JLL-JAD Document 34 Filed 04/19/13 Page 1 of 6 PageID: 331 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT District of New Jersey CHAMBERS OF MARTIN LUTHER KiNG JR. JOSE 1. LINARES FEDERAL
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
JOE WALKER and JO-ANN WALKER, v. NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Plaintiffs-Respondents, QUICK PICK SERVICE, Defendant-Appellant. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE
More information: PETITIONER, : V. COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION : BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE TOWNSHIP OF IRVINGTON, : ESSEX COUNTY, : RESPONDENT.
#131-14 (OAL Decision Not yet available online) DANA GREENE, PETITIONER, V. COMMISSIONER OF EDUCATION BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE DECISION TOWNSHIP OF IRVINGTON, ESSEX COUNTY, RESPONDENT. SYNOPSIS Pursuant
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. HAN HUNG LUONG, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, FRANK T. GEORGE, and Defendant-Respondent,
More informationMedical Malpractice Reform
Medical Malpractice Reform 49 This Act to contains a clause wherein the state legislature asks the state Supreme Court to require a plaintiff filing a medical liability claim to include a certificate of
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
STATE OF IDAHO County of KOOTENAI ss FILED AT O'Clock M CLERK OF DISTRICT COURT Deputy IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF THE STATE OF IDAHO IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF KOOTENAI EQUIPMENT
More informationHow To Find That A Medical Malpractice Claim Is Not Grounds For A Court Action
[Cite as Smith v. Gill, 2010-Ohio-4012.] Court of Appeals of Ohio EIGHTH APPELLATE DISTRICT COUNTY OF CUYAHOGA JOURNAL ENTRY AND OPINION No. 93985 GLEN A. SMITH PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT vs. DARRELL GILL, D.O.,
More informationReports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the
****************************************************** The officially released date that appears near the beginning of each opinion is the date the opinion will be published in the Connecticut Law Journal
More informationASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and to add Chapter 6 (commencing with
More informationASSEMBLY BILL No. 597
AMENDED IN ASSEMBLY APRIL 14, 2015 california legislature 2015 16 regular session ASSEMBLY BILL No. 597 Introduced by Assembly Member Cooley February 24, 2015 An act to amend Sections 36 and 877 of, and
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
FLEMINGTON SUPPLY CO., INC., v. Plaintiff-Appellant, NELSON ENTERPRISES, and Defendant, THE FRANK MCBRIDE CO., INC., NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION Defendant-Respondent.
More informationAn action brought against an attorney alleging negligence in the practice of
5.51 LEGAL MALPRACTICE (Approved 6/79) CHARGE 5.51A Page 1 of 9 A. General Duty Owing An action brought against an attorney alleging negligence in the practice of law is referred to as a malpractice action.
More informationNON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37. Appeal of: The Buzbee Law Firm No. 3340 EDA 2014
NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37 OBERMAYER REBMANN MAXWELL & HIPPEL, LLP IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA Appellee THIRD PILLAR SYSTEMS, INC. AND THE BUZBEE LAW FIRM v.
More informationWatson v. Price NO. COA10-1112. (Filed 19 April 2011) Medical Malpractice Rule 9(j) order extending statute of limitations not effective not filed
Watson v. Price NO. COA10-1112 (Filed 19 April 2011) Medical Malpractice Rule 9(j) order extending statute of limitations not effective not filed An order under N.C.G.S. 1A-1, Rule 9(j) extending the statute
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. JANENE RUSSO and GARY RUSSO, v. Plaintiffs-Respondents, CHUBB INSURANCE COMPANY
More informationCase 2:10-cv-00802-CW Document 90 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION
Case 2:10-cv-00802-CW Document 90 Filed 02/02/15 Page 1 of 5 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF UTAH, CENTRAL DIVISION MURIELLE MOLIERE, Plaintiff, v. OPTION ONE MORTGAGE, et al., Defendants.
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 24, 2010 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT NASHVILLE August 24, 2010 Session EDNA N. ZULUETA v. WINIFRED LASSITER, M.D., OF THE LASSITER CLINIC Appeal from the Circuit Court for Davidson County No. 07C-3677
More information2015 IL App (5th) 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 10/15/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140227-U NO. 5-14-0227
More informationNO. COA12-211 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 6 November 2012
NO. COA12-211 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 6 November 2012 MARION S. BRADEN, ADMINISTRATRIX OF THE ESTATE OF GREGORY ALAN BRADEN, M.D., DECEASED Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Forsyth County No. 09
More information1. Provide advice and opinions regarding workers compensation issues, as needed;
Town of West New York Requests Proposals ( RFP ) From Law Firms Interested in Serving as Workers Compensation Counsel for the Town of West New York For the Period January 1, 2016 through December 31, 2016
More informationORDER GRANTING SUMMARY JUDGMENT. THIS MATTER comes on for consideration of DEFENDANT S MOTION FOR I. STATEMENT OF THE CASE
DISTRICT COURT, EL PASO COUNTY, COLORADO Court address: P.O. Box 2980 270 South Tejon Street Colorado Springs, CO 80903 DATE FILED: July 29, 2014 2:12 PM CASE NUMBER: 2013CV2249 Phone Number: (719) 452-5279
More informationOrder. February 17, 2010 136731 & (47)
Order Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan February 17, 2010 136731 & (47) SARA GRIESBACH, as Next Friend of PATRICK GRIESBACH, Minor, and TIMOTHY GRIESBACH, Plaintiffs-Appellants/ Cross-Appellees,
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
FOR PUBLICATION ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANTS: CHERYL A. PLANCK Indianapolis, Indiana ATTORNEYS FOR APPELLEE: NORRIS CUNNINGHAM KATHRYN ELIAS CORDELL Indianapolis, Indiana IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
More informationPlaintiffs, Hon. J. Taylor. PLEASE TAKE NOTICE, that upon the annexed affirmation of Mark R. Bower, duly affirmed
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK COUNTY OF QUEENS ---------------------------------------------------------------------X LORRAINE KANDEL, as Administratrix of the Estate of JOSEPH KANDEL, Deceased,
More informationCIVIL TRIAL RULES. of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS. Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS. Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...
CIVIL TRIAL RULES of the COURTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, TEXAS Table of Contents GENERAL MATTERS Addendum to Local Rules Rule 1.10 Time Standards for the Disposition of Cases...2 Rule 1.11 Annual Calendar...3
More informationNO. COA06-1647 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 4 December 2007. Appeal by plaintiff from Opinion and Award of the North Carolina Industrial
An unpublished opinion of the North Carolina Court of Appeals does not constitute controlling legal authority. Citation is disfavored, but may be permitted in accordance with the provisions of Rule 30(e)(3)
More informationIN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
Case 1:13-cv-00046-CCE-LPA Document 24 Filed 01/06/14 Page 1 of 14 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY ) COMMISSION, ) ) Plaintiff,
More information2016 IL App (4th) 150142-UB NO. 4-15-0142 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FOURTH DISTRICT
NOTICE This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances allowed under Rule 23(e(1. 2016 IL App (4th 150142-UB NO. 4-15-0142
More informationIN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO. Plaintiff, : Case No. 12 CV 422. v. : Judge Berens
IN THE COMMON PLEAS COURT OF FAIRFIELD COUNTY, OHIO MARY LEMASTER, : Plaintiff, : Case No. 12 CV 422 v. : Judge Berens BERGER HEALTH SYSTEM ET AL., : ENTRY Granting Defendant s Motion to Dismiss Defendants.
More informationCase 1:04-cv-00623-FJS-DRH Document 57 Filed 03/30/07 Page 1 of 12. Plaintiff
Case 1:04-cv-00623-FJS-DRH Document 57 Filed 03/30/07 Page 1 of 12 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK JOHN R. CAIOLA, Plaintiff v. 1:04-CV-623 (FJS/DRH) BERKSHIRE MEDICAL CENTER,
More information2016 IL App (1st) 152359-U. SIXTH DIVISION June 17, 2016. No. 1-15-2359 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT
2016 IL App (1st 152359-U SIXTH DIVISION June 17, 2016 No. 1-15-2359 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS TERESA PATTERSON, Personal Representative of the Estate of ANNA QUEEN, UNPUBLISHED April 24, 2007 Plaintiff-Appellant, v No. 267706 Calhoun Circuit Court DIANE HABEGGER,
More informationWoodruff L. Carroll, for appellant. Mark L. Dunn, for respondents. Plaintiff Marguerite James commenced this medical
================================================================= This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. -----------------------------------------------------------------
More informationIN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS FIRST JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA TRIAL DIVISION CIVIL SECTION LOUISE FOSTER Administrator of the : AUGUST TERM 2010 Estate of GEORGE FOSTER : and BARBARA DILL : vs.
More informationSTEPHEN S. EDWARDS, individually and as Trustee of the Super Trust Fund, u/t/d June 15, 2001, Plaintiff/Appellant,
NOTICE: NOT FOR PUBLICATION. UNDER ARIZ. R. SUP. CT. 111(c), THIS DECISION DOES NOT CREATE LEGAL PRECEDENT AND MAY NOT BE CITED EXCEPT AS AUTHORIZED. IN THE ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS DIVISION ONE STEPHEN
More informationA CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO FILING APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA
A CITIZEN'S GUIDE TO FILING APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA August 2012 A CITIZEN S GUIDE TO FILING APPEALS IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF GEORGIA This pamphlet is designed primarily for parties
More informationPROPOSED ORDER GRANTING FINAL APPROVAL OF MANDATORY CLASS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
JANE DOE NO. 1, JANE ROE NO. 1, JANE ROE NO.2, and JANE ROE NO. 3 Plaintiffs, IN THE CIRCUIT COURT v. FOR THE JOHNS HOPKINS HOSPITAL, JOHNS HOPKINS COMMUNITY PHYSICIANS, and JOHNS HOPKINS HEALTH SYSTEM
More informationCASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS
CASENOTE JAMES GRAFTON RANDALL, ESQ. LAWATYOURFINGERTIPS FAILURE OF DEFENDANT TO INCLUDE PROPER CODE SECTION IN ANSWER AS TO STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS IN A CAR ACCIDENT CLAIM WAIVES THE BAR OF THE STATUTE
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FIRST APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FOUR A136605
Filed 8/28/13 Shade v. Freedhand CA1/4 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. GAIL KAMENSKY, v. Plaintiff-Appellant, HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC. and FEDERAL
More informationTORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER. Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and Plaintiff's Treating Physicians
This article originally appeared in The Colorado Lawyer, Vol. 25, No. 26, June 1996. by Jeffrey R. Pilkington TORT AND INSURANCE LAW REPORTER Informal Discovery Interviews Between Defense Attorneys and
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF INDIANA
Pursuant to Ind.Appellate Rule 65(D, this Memorandum Decision shall not be regarded as precedent or cited before any court except for the purpose of establishing the defense of res judicata, collateral
More informationDISTRICT OF COLUMBIA COURT OF APPEALS. No. 10-CV-622. Appeal from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia (CAM-480-10)
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the Atlantic and Maryland Reporters. Users are requested to notify the Clerk of the Court of any formal errors so that corrections
More informationNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. LOUISE DETLOFF, as Executrix of the Estate of Mary Mazzei, v. Plaintiff-Appellant,
More informationIllinois Official Reports
Illinois Official Reports Appellate Court CitiMortgage, Inc. v. Bukowski, 2015 IL App (1st) 140780 Appellate Court Caption CITIMORTGAGE, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee, v. ANNA BUKOWSKI and KATHERINE D. BUKOWSKI,
More informationSTATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) DECISION AND JOURNAL ENTRY
[Cite as Dunn v. State Auto. Mut. Ins., 2013-Ohio-4758.] STATE OF OHIO ) IN THE COURT OF APPEALS )ss: NINTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COUNTY OF LORAIN ) COLUMBUS E. DUNN Appellant C.A. No. 12CA010332 v. STATE
More informationIN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY
IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE IN AND FOR NEW CASTLE COUNTY NICOLE B. VERRASTRO, as Surviving ) Daughter of Bridget E. Verrastro, and ) CHRISTOPHER GIERY as the Executor of the ) Estate
More informationPRACTICE TIPS FOR SUBROGATION COUNSEL IN THE NEW JERSEY STATE COURT. COZEN AND O CONNOR 1900 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 665-2000
PRACTICE TIPS FOR SUBROGATION COUNSEL IN THE NEW JERSEY STATE COURT COZEN AND O CONNOR 1900 Market Street Philadelphia, PA 19103 (215) 665-2000 Atlanta, GA Charlotte, NC Cherry Hill, NJ Chicago, IL Columbia,
More information2015 IL App (5th) 140554-U NO. 5-14-0554 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIFTH DISTRICT
NOTICE Decision filed 08/13/15. The text of this decision may be changed or corrected prior to the filing of a Petition for Rehearing or the disposition of the same. 2015 IL App (5th 140554-U NO. 5-14-0554
More informationThis opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2008).
This opinion will be unpublished and may not be cited except as provided by Minn. Stat. 480A.08, subd. 3 (2008). STATE OF MINNESOTA IN COURT OF APPEALS A09-1383 Diane L. Sheehan, Appellant, vs. Robert
More informationWorkers Compensation Mandatory Attorney Fees
STATE OF NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY LAW REVISION COMMISSION Draft Tentative Report Relating to November 7, 2011 This draft tentative report is distributed to advise interested persons of the Commission's tentative
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS STACEY MCELHANEY, as Next Friend of JEREL MCELHANEY, a Minor, Plaintiff-Appellant/Cross-Appellee, FOR PUBLICATION January 19, 2006 9:10 a.m. v No. 254376 Wayne Circuit
More informationOffice of the Comptroller v. Colonial Roofing Company, Inc. OATH Index No. 632/13, mem. dec. (Feb. 19, 2013)
Office of the Comptroller v. Colonial Roofing Company, Inc. OATH Index No. 632/13, mem. dec. (Feb. 19, 2013) In prevailing wage case, contractor sought summary judgment dismissing petition due to delay
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 21, 2008 Session
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON October 21, 2008 Session DORIS JONES and BILLY JONES v. LISA JUNE COX Direct Appeal from the Circuit Court for Madison County No. C-06-390 (Div. III) Jerry
More informationIN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT CRISTOBAL COLON, Appellant, NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED v. Case No.
More informationNO. COA12-981 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS. Filed: 19 March 2013. 1. Motor Vehicles Lemon Law disclosure requirement
NO. COA12-981 NORTH CAROLINA COURT OF APPEALS Filed: 19 March 2013 TINA HARDISON and DALTON HARDISON, Plaintiffs, v. Craven County No. 10 CVS 01538 KIA MOTORS AMERICA, INC., Defendant. 1. Motor Vehicles
More information2015 IL App (1st) 140470-U. No. 1-14-0470 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS FIRST DISTRICT
2015 IL App (1st) 140470-U SECOND DIVISION June 16, 2015 No. 1-14-0470 NOTICE: This order was filed under Supreme Court Rule 23 and may not be cited as precedent by any party except in the limited circumstances
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 9/17/15; pub. order 10/13/15 (see end of opn.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE MOBILE MEDICAL SERVICES FOR PHYSICIANS AND ADVANCED PRACTICE
More informationCounty products liability suit, and subsequently quashed Plaintiff s appeal to the Pennsylvania Superior Court.
March 1, 2010 I. FIRM NEWS 1. On March 19, 2010 firm member, Thomas F. Gallagher, Esquire gave a presentation in Mount Laurel, New Jersey on relevant statutory immunities for community based youth sports
More informationFollow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008
2008 Decisions Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit 10-23-2008 Motise v. Parrish Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential Docket No. 08-1881 Follow this and additional
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON
No. 157 April 16, 2014 317 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF OREGON Maricela RAMIREZ, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NORTHWEST RENAL CLINIC, Defendant-Respondent, and RAYMOND PETRILLO, MD, and Does 1 to
More informationNew Jersey Lawyers Website: www.njlawconnect.com Tel: (201) 498-0400 Fax: (201) 498-0016 55 Hudson Street Hackensack, New Jersey 07601
New Jersey Lawyers Website: www.njlawconnect.com Tel: (201) 498-0400 Fax: (201) 498-0016 55 Hudson Street Hackensack, New Jersey 07601 ENFORCEMENT OF FOREIGN JUDGMENTS IN NEW JERSEY: AN OVERVIEW By: Glenn
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE B254585
Filed 2/26/15 Vega v. Goradia CA2/5 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
More informationNo. 3 09 0033 THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2009
No. 3 09 0033 Filed December 16, 2009 IN THE APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS THIRD DISTRICT A.D., 2009 KEPPLE AND COMPANY, INC., ) Appeal from the Circuit Court an Illinois Corporation, ) of the 10th Judicial
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION EIGHT
Filed 2/11/15 Estate of Thomson CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
More informationCIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS
IN THE Court of Appeals STATE OF ARIZONA DIVISION ONE CIVIL APPEALS DOCKETING STATEMENT INSTRUCTIONS Arizona Rule of Civil Appellate Procedure 12(e) requires an appellant to file a civil appeals docketing
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE
Filed 10/22/99 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION FIVE DILLON BOLTON, Plaintiff and Appellant, B123278 (Super. Ct. No. SC037295)
More informationCase 1:11-md-02290-RGS Document 396 Filed 12/06/13 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) ) ) ) ) )
Case 1:11-md-02290-RGS Document 396 Filed 12/06/13 Page 1 of 10 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS IN RE JPMORGAN CHASE MORTGAGE MODIFICATION LITIGATION THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: All
More informationMEMORANDUM. October 1,2008. Emergent Medical Care, Contact Person, Enforcement and UEF Rule Proposals
DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT JON S. CORZINE PO BOX 381 DAVID J. SOCOLOW Governor TRENTON, NEW JERSEY 08625-0381 Commissioner MEMORANDUM October 1,2008 To: All Judges, Attorneys and Case
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION SIX
Filed 12/18/14 Zulli v. Balfe CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified
More informationSupreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions. (a) Discovery Methods.
Supreme Court Rule 201. General Discovery Provisions (a) Discovery Methods. Information is obtainable as provided in these rules through any of the following discovery methods: depositions upon oral examination
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 1/9/02; pub. order 1/28/02 (see end of opn.) IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA FOURTH APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE ISRAEL P. CHAMBI, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. THE REGENTS OF
More informationStorm Damage Arbitration Agreement ADR Systems File # xxxxxxxxx Insurance Claim # xxxxxxxxxx
Storm Damage Arbitration Agreement ADR Systems File # Insurance Claim # x I. Parties A. xxxxx B. xxxxx II., Time and Location of the Arbitration : Time: Location: III. Rules Governing the Arbitration Each
More informationAlani Golanski, for appellants. Christian H. Gannon, for respondent. A statute requires anyone who brings a lawsuit against
================================================================= This opinion is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York Reports. -----------------------------------------------------------------
More informationSTATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS
STATE OF MICHIGAN COURT OF APPEALS DORETHA RAMSEY JACKSON, Plaintiff-Appellee, UNPUBLISHED September 12, 2006 v No. 262466 Wayne Circuit Court HARPER HOSPITAL, LC No. 04-402087-NI Defendant-Appellant.
More informationPersonal injury claim" does not include a claim for compensatory benefits pursuant to worker s compensation or veterans benefits.
Wisconsin AB 19 (2013) (a) Personal injury claim" means any claim for damages, loss, indemnification, contribution, restitution or other relief, including punitive damages, that is related to bodily injury
More informationConsensus of Judges on Multnomah County Court Foreclosure Panel
Consensus of Judges on Multnomah County Court Foreclosure Panel The judges who serve on the Multnomah County Court s Foreclosure Panel have been presented with the following recurring issues, which over
More informationColorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation
Colorado s Civil Access Pilot Project and the Changing Landscape of Business Litigation On January 1, 2012, new rules approved by the Colorado Supreme Court entitled the Civil Access Pilot Project ( CAPP
More informationIN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE
Filed 9/19/13 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION THREE LAS VEGAS LAND AND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, LLC et al., Plaintiffs and Appellants,
More informationTEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
TEXAS RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE PART V - RULES OF PRACTICE IN JUSTICE COURTS Adopted by the Supreme Court of Texas Justice Court, Pct 1 1 of 24 TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1. GENERAL... 6 RULE 523. DISTRICT
More information