In New Jersey, the verbal threshold limits plaintiffs from bringing a lawsuit for injuries sustained in an automobile accident. Specifically, this limitation requires a permanent injury or one that results in a whole or partial loss of a body member or function in order to file suit. Plaintiffs must produce expert reports or documents that support a finding of some level of permanent injury in order to vault the limitation-on-lawsuit threshold as soft-tissue injuries are not sufficient.
In Resua v. Hachkian, plaintiffs were rear-ended by a vehicle operated by an intoxicated defendant. The principal issue was plaintiffs’ damages, as both plaintiffs alleged various soft-tissue injuries that were not sufficient to vault the limitation-on-lawsuit threshold without an expert report supporting a finding of permanent injuries.
During the lawsuit, plaintiffs’ attorney had a relapse on an illness that caused delays in discovery. As such, he failed to produce expert reports within the discovery deadline. After an unsuccessful arbitration, defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. Plaintiffs produced expert reports in late August and additionally filed a cross-motion seeking an extension of the discovery end date.
The trial court denied plaintiff’s motion and granted defendant’s motion for summary judgment, opining that plaintiffs’ attorney’s illness did not constitute an exceptional circumstance warranting an extension of discovery, and finding that plaintiff’s medical records without the support of expert opinion did not suffice to establish permanent injuries. On appeal, the appellate court agreed that that plaintiffs’ attorney failed to show how his illness impacted his ability to function in the months leading up to the latest discovery end date when his expert reports were due. As such, the plaintiffs’ expert reports were to be disregarded and without expert reports, plaintiffs failed to show permanent injury. Thanks to Steve Kim for his contribution to this post. Please email Brian Gibbons with any questions.