X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
Vol. 4, No. 237 — December 13, 1996 STATE COURT CASES CORRECTIONS 13-2-0769 Connerton v. Dept. of Corrections, App. Div. (6 pp.) The fact that inmate, speaking loudly and angrily, came toward prison supervisor quickly, threw something in her direction, and indicated that he was unconcerned with the repercussions of disciplinary sanctions all constituted objective, reasonable and substantial evidence that inmate’s words and actions constituted a threat and conveyed a basis for fear to a prison staff member, and disciplinary ruling is affirmed. INSURANCE — LEGAL MALPRACTICE 23-2-0770 Grassano v. Panny, et al.; Switzer v. The Home Ins. Co., et al.; Krattenmaker v. The Home Ins. Co., et al., App. Div. (17 pp.) Interpreting the terms of legal malpractice policy, the court correctly held that innocent partners were provided coverage for suit by client whose funds were misappropriated by managing partner. INSURANCE — UNDERINSURED MOTORIST COVERAGE 23-2-0771 Cook-Sauvageau v. The PMA Group, et al., App. Div. (10 pp.) An employee who is injured while operating an employer’s motor vehicle during the course of employment is entitled to UIM coverage provided the employee under the plain language of the employer’s standard business automobile policy. [Approved for publication Dec. 13, 1996.] 23-2-0772 Barrett v. N.J. Mfrs. Ins. Co., App. Div. (8 pp.) Insurer’s authorization to plaintiff to settle her claim against the tortfeasor and its implicit agreement to pay the plaintiff UIM benefits now estops the insurer from denying UIM benefits on the basis of Aubrey. [Approved for publication Dec. 13, 1996.] INSURANCE — VERBAL THRESHOLD 23-2-0773 CARR V. ALEXANDER, APP. DIV. (5 PP.) Where 36-year old plaintiff’s only limitation after his accident was that he could no longer play competitive basketball, there was an insufficient serious impact on his life to vault his case over the verbal threshold, and the case was properly dismissed. PHYSICIANS 29-2-0774 Bloom, et al. v. Clara Maass Medical Center, et al., App. Div. (24 pp.) In a case where plaintiff radiologist alleges that he was unlawfully denied hospital staff privileges when he refused to sign an employment contract with the hospital’s radiology chairperson, the court holds, inter alia, that hospital’s decision to enter into an exclusive contract with chairperson of its radiology department for the provision of radiological services was reasonably related to an appropriate public health objective and did not unfairly deprive plaintiff of a constitutionally protected right. [Approved for publication Dec. 13, 1996.] PHYSICIAN/PATIENT 29-2-0775 Phillip v. Gewirtz, et al., App. Div. (7 pp.) Neither of pro se plaintiff’s claims — that the medical professionals erroneously diagnosed a twin gestation, or that defendants delivered a dead twin but suppressed the fact and disposed of the body without plaintiff’s authorization — can be proved without expert testimony and since none has been produced, summary judgment dismissing the case is affirmed. TAXATION 35-2-0776 3912-3922 Bergenline Ave. v. City of Union City, App. Div. (5 pp.) Judge’s rejection of plaintiff’s expert’s valuations constituted an implicit finding that plaintiff did not overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the municipality’s valuation by sufficient competent evidence, therefore, even if judge improperly allowed the municipal assessor to testify concerning his view of the property’s value, the judge’s ultimate decision was not based on such testimony and there was no error. FEDERAL COURT CASES INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY — TRANSFER 53-7-0777 Rutgers v. Minnesota Mining and Mfg. Co., et al., U.S. Dist. Ct. (9 pp.) Since the first-to-file rule is especially honored in patent cases, and does not depend on whether or not the first filed case is a declaratory action, the court grants defendant’s motion to transfer this infringement action to Minnesota to be heard with the defendant’s first-filed declaratory judgment suit against plaintiff — seeking a non-infringement determination regarding transdermal adhesive estrogen patches. [Filed Nov. 26, 1996.] TAXATION 35-8-0778 Estate of Rose D’Ambrosio v. Commr. of Internal Revenue Service, Third Cir. (32 pp.) The tax court erred in holding that, even though the decedent had sold her remainder interest in closely held stock for its fair market value, 26 U.S.C. 2036(a)(1) brought its entire fee simple value back into her gross estate. [Filed Nov. 26, 1996.] Copyright 1996 by American Lawyer Media, L.P. A Daily Reporter of New Jersey Court Decisions THIS WEEK IN THE … With the help of one of the state’s most plugged-in law firms, a potent new statute and a court ruling that knocks out competitors, United Water Resources Inc. is cleaning up. See page 1 of the Dec.16 Law Journal.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 1 article* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2021 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.