04-2-3832 Marra v. Hockfield, Hasner & Associates , App. Div. (per curiam) (10 pp.) Plaintiff’s legal-malpractice claims arise from representation by Louis G. Hasner, Esq., of the firm of Hockfield, Hasner & Associates (defendants), in a suit for damages allegedly sustained as a result of an automobile accident. The appellate panel affirmed, finding the Law Division judge appropriately granted defendants’ request for summary judgment on the basis that the dismissal of the earlier automobile negligence proceeding, which was caused by plaintiff’s lack of medical proofs, was not a result of any legal malpractice committed by defendants. [Decided May 15, 2009.]
AUTOMOBILES — EXPERTS — MISTRIALS
05-2-3833 McNally v. Geruldsen , App. Div. (per curiam) (7 pp.) Plaintiff appeals from the dismissal of his complaint seeking damages for injuries sustained in an auto accident in which he intended to rely on the results of an MRI to establish the permanent injury required for recovery under AICRA. In affirming the dismissal, the panel finds that the court did not err in concluding that plaintiff’s chiropractor could not testify about the results of his MRI nor in denying plaintiff’s unopposed motion for a mistrial where plaintiff’s inability to proceed was based on a failure to anticipate a timely objection to incompetent evidence. [Decided May 14, 2009.]
