Back to Columns | Print Column | ||
State: N.J. Gelman: Accelerated Justice Is Problematic on Appeal: [2017-02-21] |
||
|
||
Workers' compensation matters were intended by the Legislature to be summary and remedial actions. Accelerated justice does have its consequences on appeal, and should be implemented prudently. In an effort to move case dockets at a quicker pace, New Jersey implemented an accelerated award procedure, "a trial on reports," that allowed for the disposition of cases at the pre-trial conference stage. It was to be utilized either by the consent of the parties where the only issue presented was the nature and extent of permanent disability.
One of the adverse consequences of such a proceeding is a very limited record on review. Litigation usually provides the opportunity of cross-examination. The use of an "trial on reports" results in the waiver of the opportunity to cross-examine medical exports. In a recent unreported case, the Appellate Court reviewing the record on a "trial on reports" was limited to the record, petitioner's testimony, petitioner's medical reports and the parties' expert reports. On appeal, the petitioner appeared, pro se. The decision in Sondhi v. Tropicana Hotel and Casino was affirmed. The court opined:
Many other jurisdictions provide the opportunity to take the depositions of the medical experts and to utilize the transcripts as evidence at the time of the trial. Perhaps, while the rules permit their use in New Jersey, such evidence should be a key factor in preparation of a case for trial, even if the only issue is merely "the nature and extent of permanent disability." Jon Gelman is a New Jersey claimants’ attorney and frequent blogger on workers’ compensation topics. |