In the consolidated matters of Beltran v. DeLima, Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, Docket No. A-6056-03T2 and Imerman v. Munoz, Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, Docket No. A-6673-03T1, the court concluded that the New Jersey Supreme Court opinions in DiProspero and Serrano, which held that a plaintiff did not need to prove a serious life impact to pierce the verbal threshold, are to be afforded "pipeline retroactivity". Thus the holdings of DiProspero and Serrano apply to all prejudgment matters pending in the trial courts and to those matters that are on direct appeal. The Appellate Division stressed that the focus of the opinion was solely upon cases on appeal from final judgments and cases that are now pending in the trial courts. The court did not consider whether DiProspero and Serrano should apply to cases that have been disposed of and are no longer pending in the trial courts or on appeal and are thus not in the "pipeline." However, the court did not dismiss the possibility that DiProspero and Serrano could apply retroactively to all cases. The court notes that "because the issue is not presented, we do not here consider whether to give the new rule complete retroactive effect, applying it to all cases, even if final judgments have been entered and avenues of direct appeal have been exhausted."
If you would like to read a copy of the Beltran opinion, please click here.
Should you have any questions about the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Very truly yours,
Glendon E. Danks
For further information, please contact Glendon E. Danks, Esquire.
Telephone: 856-751-5285
E-mail: danks@bbs-law.com
