On February 22, 2017 a
Order
was filed
involving a dispute between
Deana A Checchio,
and
Eastern Dental Of Woodbridge,
Pasquale Tolomeo Dds,
for Medical Malpractice
in the District Court of Middlesex County.
Preview
MID-L-001143-17
MID L 001143-1707/13/2020 1:11:39 PM
08/28/2020 PgPg1 of1 2ofTrans
2 TransID:ID: LCV20201213069
LCV20201520411
*DENIED
24th August
MID-L-001143-17
MID L 001143-1707/13/2020 1:11:39 PM
08/28/2020 PgPg2 of2 2ofTrans
2 TransID:ID: LCV20201213069
LCV20201520411
Hon. Dennis V. Nieves,
x
The Court agrees with Plaintiff's position that rulings on Dr. Greenwald's testimony should be made at
trial, after the Court has heard the factual evidence, ruled on the expert's qualifications and listened to
the questions and answers from the expert witness. The Appellate Division has instructed that because
in limine motions, such as the present, are presented in the abstract and not in the context of the facts
adduced at trial, requests for such rulings should be granted only sparingly. Bellardi v. Krikorian, 222
N.J. Super. 457, 464 (App. Div. 1988).
The net opinion rule does not require that an expert organize or support an opinion in a particular
manner that opposing counsel deems preferable. Townsend v. Pierre, 221 N.J. 36, 54 (2015). The
expert's failure “to give weight to a factor thought important by an adverse party does not reduce his
testimony to an inadmissible net opinion if he otherwise offers sufficient reasons which logically
support his conclusion. Such omissions may be a proper subject of exploration and cross-examination
at trial.Id. at 54-55 (citations omitted). Dr. Behar's report is based upon the factual foundation of
Plaintiff's medical history he obtained from Plaintiff. Dr. Behar's report details the treatment and
condition of Plaintiff's medical history within said report. Accordingly, the Court denies Defendants'
motion to bar the portion of Dr. Behar's testimony/report regarding Plaintiff's multiple sclerosis.
Document Filed Date
August 28, 2020
Case Filing Date
February 22, 2017
Category
Medical Malpractice
For full print and download access, please subscribe at https://www.trellis.law/.
Preview
MID-L-001143-17 MID L 001143-1707/13/2020 1:11:39 PM 08/28/2020 PgPg1 of1 2ofTrans 2 TransID:ID: LCV20201213069 LCV20201520411 *DENIED 24th August MID-L-001143-17 MID L 001143-1707/13/2020 1:11:39 PM 08/28/2020 PgPg2 of2 2ofTrans 2 TransID:ID: LCV20201213069 LCV20201520411 Hon. Dennis V. Nieves, x The Court agrees with Plaintiff's position that rulings on Dr. Greenwald's testimony should be made at trial, after the Court has heard the factual evidence, ruled on the expert's qualifications and listened to the questions and answers from the expert witness. The Appellate Division has instructed that because in limine motions, such as the present, are presented in the abstract and not in the context of the facts adduced at trial, requests for such rulings should be granted only sparingly. Bellardi v. Krikorian, 222 N.J. Super. 457, 464 (App. Div. 1988). The net opinion rule does not require that an expert organize or support an opinion in a particular manner that opposing counsel deems preferable. Townsend v. Pierre, 221 N.J. 36, 54 (2015). The expert's failure “to give weight to a factor thought important by an adverse party does not reduce his testimony to an inadmissible net opinion if he otherwise offers sufficient reasons which logically support his conclusion. Such omissions may be a proper subject of exploration and cross-examination at trial.Id. at 54-55 (citations omitted). Dr. Behar's report is based upon the factual foundation of Plaintiff's medical history he obtained from Plaintiff. Dr. Behar's report details the treatment and condition of Plaintiff's medical history within said report. Accordingly, the Court denies Defendants' motion to bar the portion of Dr. Behar's testimony/report regarding Plaintiff's multiple sclerosis.