Superior Court of New Jersey
871 A.2d 156 (N.J. Super. Ct. Law Div. 2004)
Diaz (defendant) was driving an ambulance that belonged to Robert Wood Johnson University Hospital at Hamilton (RWJ) (defendant) when he hit Panniel’s (plaintiff) car. Panniel’s foot was cut, and she was diagnosed with new onset diabetes. Panniel’s toes were amputated. Later, Panniel was diagnosed with carpal tunnel syndrome. Panniel filed a claim for personal injury protection (PIP) medical benefits with her insurance provider, New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company (NJM) (defendant). Panniel also filed a tort lawsuit against the defendants in New Jersey Superior Court. NJM contested Panniel’s PIP claims on the ground that the injuries were not the result of the car accident, and the case was submitted to arbitration. NJM also insured Diaz and RJW. In the arbitration between Panniel and NJM, the parties engaged in significant discovery and put on substantial evidence related to the causal link between Panniel’s injuries and the accident. The arbitrator examined medical records. Panniel’s doctor testified and was cross-examined, and NJM submitted a written report from its own expert. The arbitrator concluded that Panniel’s foot injury and amputation were “causally related” to the accident and ordered NJM to pay the medical benefits under the policy, but that the carpal tunnel was not the result of the accident. Panniel then filed a motion in the trial court, seeking partial summary judgment on the issue of causation. Panniel argued that the defendants were collaterally estopped from relitigating the issue. Panniel agreed to waive damages above the defendants’ policy limits with NJM. Diaz and RJW objected to the motion on the ground that they were not parties to the arbitration action and should not be bound.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Sabatino, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 220,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,100 briefs, keyed to 189 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.