JAMES WALSH v. BARNABAS HEALTH COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER
Annotate this CaseNOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3. SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-4821-16T4 JAMES WALSH as Administrator ad Prosequendum of the Estate of JOHN PATRICK WALSH, JR., Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. BARNABAS HEALTH COMMUNITY MEDICAL CENTER, Defendant-Respondent. _________________________________ Argued May 15, 2018 – Decided May 22, 2018 Before Judges Fisher and Fasciale. On appeal from Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Ocean County, Docket No. L-1589- 16. Lynette Siragusa argued the cause for appellant (Siragusa Law Firm, LLC, attorneys; Lynette Siragusa, of counsel and on the briefs; Robert D. Bailey, on the brief). John M. Hockin, Jr. argued the cause for respondent (Ronan Tuzzio & Giannone, PC, attorneys; Lauren H. Zalepka, of counsel and on the brief; Nicole M. Geraci, on the brief). PER CURIAM Plaintiff appeals from an order dismissing the complaint for failure to serve a timely Affidavit of Merit (AOM) as required by the AOM statute, N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-26 to -29. We conclude that plaintiff's arguments are without sufficient merit to warrant discussion in a written opinion, R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E), and affirm substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge James Den Uyl in his written opinion. We add the following brief remarks. The decedent sought medical treatment at the Community Medical Center (defendant). A licensed nurse practitioner in the emergency department examined decedent, ordered a urine test, and discharged him. Within a week, decedent committed suicide. Plaintiff sued defendant, a licensed health care facility, not the nurse practitioner. Defendant filed its answer on November 3, 2016. On January 4, 2017, the judge conducted a Ferreira1 conference and extended the AOM deadline sixty days. Although service of the AOM was due no later than March 3, 2017, plaintiff served it on April 11, 2017. Plaintiff therefore failed to "state a cause of action." N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-29. Plaintiff's purported reason for missing the deadline – difficulty finding an appropriate expert – is 1 Ferreira v. Rancocas Orthopedic Assocs., 178 N.J. 144 (2003). 2 A-4821-16T4 insufficient to establish exceptional circumstances to extend the deadline. Affirmed. 3 A-4821-16T4
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.