WILLIAM HAMMER v. DOUGLAS W. THOMAS A-0209-08T2/A-0742-08T2

08-09-10 WILLIAM HAMMER v. DOUGLAS W. THOMAS, ET AL.
PROFORMANCE INSURANCE CO. v. NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INS. CO., ET AL.
A-0209-08T2/A-0742-08T2 (consolidated)
In this declaratory judgment action instituted by the
injured motorist's UM carrier, we affirm the trial court's grant
of summary judgment in favor of the tortfeasor's automobile
insurance provider who declined coverage based on the policy
exclusion for any insured "[w]ho intentionally causes bodily
injury or property damage." We hold that the policy was not
ambiguous and that the standard to be applied is that set forth
in Voorhees v. Preferred Mutual Insurance Co., 128 N.J. 165
(1992) and its progeny relating to automobile, homeowners and
related liability policies, and not that set forth in the
workers' compensation case of Charles Beseler Co. v. O'Gorman &
Young, Inc., 188 N.J. 542 (2006).

JACQUELINE BETANCOURT V. TRINITAS HOSPITAL A-3849-08T2 08-13-10

JACQUELINE BETANCOURT V. TRINITAS HOSPITAL A-3849-08T2 08-13-10
Although this appeal raises a significant issue regarding
the conflict between a patient and healthcare providers
regarding the continuation of medical treatment where the
patient is in a persistent vegetative state, we grant
plaintiff's motion to dismiss the appeal as moot. We conclude
that the following factors support such dismissal: 1) the
patient is deceased and the results of this appeal will not
affect his rights; 2) there is a dispute between the parties as
to the decedent's condition at the time medical treatment was
withdrawn; 3) the record is inadequate to address the issues in
dispute; 4) the prospect of a malpractice action by plaintiff
against the healthcare providers, as well as the substantial
outstanding medical bills, create issues that are unlikely to
reoccur.

MOORE V. WOMAN TO WOMAN OBSTETRICS GYNECOLOGY A-0953-09T10

KORAL MOORE V. WOMAN TO WOMAN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
A-0953-09T10 8-18-10
Plaintiffs, an infant and the child's parents, filed a
complaint alleging medical malpractice and seeking damages for
wrongful birth and life. This is an appeal from orders
compelling arbitration of all three plaintiffs' claims against a
defendant doctor and his practice group, which rendered care to
the mother during her pregnancy. We conclude that agreements to
arbitrate pre-dispute medical malpractice claims are not
unenforceable as a matter of law, and provide direction for the
reconsideration of plaintiffs' claim that this contract of
adhesion requiring arbitration is unenforceable under the
circumstances present in this case

Robertet Flavors, Inc. v. Tri-Form Construction, Inc. (A-70/71-08)

Robertet Flavors, Inc. v. Tri-Form Construction, Inc. (A-70/71-08) 8-3-10
Courts confronted with spoliation in commercial
construction litigation should consider the identity
of the spoliator; the manner in which the spoliation
occurred; the prejudice to the non-spoliator and
whether that party bears any responsibility for the
loss of spoliated evidence; and the alternate sources
of information available to the non-spoliator. Courts
should balance all of those considerations in crafting
an appropriate remedy consistent with fundamental
fairness.

Gina Stelluti v. Casapenn Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Powerhouse Gym (A-43-09)

Gina Stelluti v. Casapenn Enterprises, LLC d/b/a Powerhouse Gym (A-43-09) 8-5-10

The Court affirms the judgment of the Appellate
Division, which upheld the dismissal of plaintiff Gina
Stelluti’s negligence claims against defendant
Powerhouse Gym for injuries she sustained on exercise
equipment. It is not contrary to the public interest,
or to a legal duty owed, to enforce the pre-injury
waiver of liability agreement that Stelluti entered
into with Powerhouse Gym, which limited the gym’s
liability for injuries arising from a patron’s
participation in instructed activity and voluntary use
of the gym’s equipment.