Physical Health Plan
No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Fitness
  • Mental Health
  • Recipes
  • Workouts
  • Food & Nutrition
  • Home
  • Fitness
  • Mental Health
  • Recipes
  • Workouts
  • Food & Nutrition
No Result
View All Result
Physical Health Plan
No Result
View All Result
Home Uncategorized

Affidavit of Merit Not Needed in Vicarious Liability Claims, Rules New Jersey High Court

Related articles

What Should You Do If You’re in a Car Accident While Out of State?

Case study: Snapsheet’s virtual claims management technology

A plaintiff is not required to present an affidavit of merit when bringing a vicarious liability claim against a licensed entity for the alleged negligence of an unlicensed employee, the New Jersey Supreme Court has ruled.

According to the court, an affidavit is still needed in claims of negligence brought directly against the employer but not in vicarious liability claims involving an unlicensed employee.

The state’s affidavit of merit (AOM) statute requires plaintiffs in professional negligence actions to provide an affidavit from a licensed professional attesting to the merit of the plaintiffs’ claims. The statute explicitly limits the term “licensed person” to certain individuals and entities that include healthcare facilities and states that failure to submit the required affidavit “shall be deemed a failure to state a cause of action” and may result in dismissal of an otherwise meritorious claim.

This case involved a claim by a radiological examination patient against Lourdes Medical Center, which maintained that because it is a licensed entity, the plaintiff needed an AOM. However, the plaintiff argued that because he was suing the facility solely on a theory of vicarious liability for the conduct of an unlicensed employee, an AOM was unnecessary.

The state’s high court agreed with the plaintiff, noting that although the defendant Lourdes Medical Center is a “licensed person” under the statute, the plaintiff was not claiming that the medical center was professionally negligent, but rather that it was vicariously liable for the negligent acts of its unlicensed employee

The high court had not previously addressed this precise legal question, however it noted that the appellate division has found that vicarious liability claims are tethered to the AOM requirements as to the alleged employee, not the employer.

In February 2018, following surgery on his left shoulder, plaintiff Troy Haviland went to Lourdes Medical Center for a radiological examination. Havilland alleges that during the examination, an unidentified radiology technician asked him to “hold weights contrary to the [ordering physician’s] instructions.” While holding the weights, he sustained an injury to his newly repaired left shoulder, requiring a surgical procedure two months later.

According to the statute, the AOM requirement applies only where (1) a plaintiff’s claim is for personal injuries, wrongful death, or property damages, (2) the personal injuries, wrongful death, or property damages result from an alleged act of malpractice or negligence, and (3) the alleged act of malpractice or negligence is carried out by a licensed person in the course of practicing the person’s profession.

In this case, both the first and second requirements of the statute apply to Havilland’s claim: he alleges that defendant’s employee caused him serious personal injuries by “deviat[ing] from accepted standards of medical care.” However, the court noted, the vicarious liability claim against defendant does not satisfy the AOM statute’s third element because the alleged act of “malpractice or negligence” was not committed by a “licensed person.”

The court stressed that, if the plaintiff had raised any direct claims against the hospital for negligent hiring, training, or supervision of the non-licensed employee, those claims would have been properly dismissed for failure to provide a timely AOM. But plaintiff’s purely vicarious claim may go forward.

The court further noted that, although plaintiff may pursue his claim without submission of an AOM from a licensed expert, the holding in this case “in no way relieves him of the burden of demonstrating the technician’s professional negligence at trial.”

[Read More…]

Previous Post

Philadelphia to Restore Indoor Mask Mandate Amid Covid Case Surge

Next Post

Heffernan leaders step into expanded roles

Related Posts

Uncategorized

What Should You Do If You’re in a Car Accident While Out of State?

October 9, 2024
Uncategorized

Case study: Snapsheet’s virtual claims management technology

May 20, 2022
Uncategorized

Arbella Insurance partners up to launch Insurance Academy

May 20, 2022
Uncategorized

Ford Recalls 39,000 U.S. SUVs After Engine Fire Reports

May 20, 2022
Uncategorized

Growth of Massive New Mexico Wildfire Slowed

May 20, 2022
Uncategorized

Policies’ Arbitration, AOB Endorsements are Unconstitutional, Florida Lawsuit Claims

May 20, 2022

Search..

No Result
View All Result

Subscribe Us

By clicking submit, I authorize Physical Health Plan and its affiliated companies to: (1) use, sell, and share my information for marketing purposes, including cross-context behavioral advertising, as described in our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, (2) supplement the information that I provide with additional information lawfully obtained from other sources, like demographic data from public sources, interests inferred from web page views, or other data relevant to what might interest me, like past purchase or location data, (3) contact me or enable others to contact me by email with offers for goods and services from any category at the email address provided, and (4) retain my information while I am engaging with marketing messages that I receive and for a reasonable amount of time thereafter. I understand I can opt out at any time through an email that I receive, or by clicking here

Recommended

Step by Step Instructions to Choose the Right Running Chews

December 24, 2021

Hot Yoga Is No Better for You Than Regular Yoga, Study Says

December 23, 2021
  • Contact Us
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms Of Service
  • Unsubscribe
  • Privacy Choices

© 2025 Physical Health Plan. All Rights Reserved.

No Result
View All Result
  • Home
  • Fitness
  • Mental Health
  • Recipes
  • Workouts
  • Food & Nutrition

© 2025 Physical Health Plan. All Rights Reserved.

Skip to content
Open toolbar Accessibility Tools

Accessibility Tools

  • Increase TextIncrease Text
  • Decrease TextDecrease Text
  • GrayscaleGrayscale
  • High ContrastHigh Contrast
  • Negative ContrastNegative Contrast
  • Light BackgroundLight Background
  • Links UnderlineLinks Underline
  • Readable FontReadable Font
  • Reset Reset