Jimenez v. Baglieri

5 Citing cases

  1. Jimenez v. Baglieri

    690 A.2d 608 (N.J. 1997)

    Granted. 295 N.J. Super. 162 684 A.2d 969

  2. Jimenez v. Baglieri

    152 N.J. 337 (N.J. 1998)   Cited 24 times
    Finding imposition of verbal threshold requirement on claims for noneconomic damages in hit-and-run cases necessary to prevent fraud and abuse

    The panel, relying on Rivera v. Fortunato, 285 N.J. Super. 168, 666 A.2d 619 (Law Div. 1995), concluded that the verbal threshold does not apply to plaintiffs injured by hit-and-run motorists. 295 N.J. Super. 162, 684 A.2d 969 (1996). The court also held that the trial court had abused its discretion in denying the one-day adjournment, and therefore, the court remanded the case for a new trial on damages.

  3. Lloyd v. Lloyd

    DOCKET NO. A-4586-16T3 (App. Div. Jun. 29, 2018)

    Connors v. Sexton Studios, Inc., 270 N.J. Super. 390, 395 (App. Div. 1994); see also Jiminez v. Baglieri, 295 N.J. Super. 162, 165 (App. Div. 1996)(abuse of discretion found where trial court denied a one-day adjournment because of unavailability of expert), rev'd on other grounds, 152 N.J. 337 (1998). In this case, Capone, as a solo practitioner, was the only attorney available to try the case to completion.

  4. Meltzer v. Meltzer

    DOCKET NO. A-4429-12T4 (App. Div. Apr. 3, 2014)

    Connors v. Sexton Studios, Inc., 270 N.J. Super. 390, 395 (App. Div. 1994); see also Jimenez v. Baglieri, 295 N.J. Super. 162, 165 (App. Div. 1996) (abuse of discretion found where trial court denied a one-day adjournment because of unavailability of expert), rev'd on other grounds, 152 N.J. 337 (1998). We recognize that denial of the adjournment request ultimately led to a harsh result, i.e., the dismissal of plaintiff's complaint.

  5. Hernandez v. N. Jersey Neurosurgical Assocs.

    DOCKET NO. A-0890-12T2 (App. Div. May. 14, 2013)

    Connors v. Sexton Studios, Inc., 270 N.J. Super. 390, 395 (App. Div. 1994); see also Jimenez v. Baglieri, 295 N.J. Super. 162, 165 (App. Div. 1996) (abuse of discretion found where trial court denied a one-day adjournment because of unavailability of expert), rev'd on other grounds, 152 N.J. 337 (1998). Here, Ganepola argues that he is a blameless litigant whose chosen attorney could not be in two places at once.