Issue: Under the Illinois Rules of Evidence, must the facts an expert refers to when forming his or her opinion be admissible as evidence?
|Area of Law:||Uncategorized|
|Keywords:||; Expert; Opinion; Evidence; Admissible|
|Cited Cases:||756 N.E.2d 338; 382 Ill. Dec. 251; 49 Ill. Dec. 308; 417 N.E.2d 1322|
New Jersey Rule 4:42-2 provides information for filing an application to reconsider a judgment on a particular matter. The Rule states:
[A]ny order or form of decision which adjudicates fewer than all the claims as to all the parties shall not terminate the action as to any of the claims, and it shall be subject to revision at any time before the entry of final judgment in the sound discretion of the court in the interest of justice. To the extent possible, application for reconsideration shall be made to the trial judge who entered the order.
N.J. R. 4:42-2 (2016).
In Gilkin v. Board of Chosen Freeholders for Gloucester County, the court discussed the requirements for seeking an order under Rule 4:42-2.
As the purpose of Rule 4:42-2 is "to permit execution on a partial summary judgment fully adjudicating a separable claim for affirmative relief . . .," ibid. (quotation and citation omitted), "a party may not seek a finality certification to bypass this court’s exclusive authority to determine whether to grant leave to appeal an interlocutory order," id. at 551 (citation omitted). The consequence of improperly using a finality certification is that this court will vacate the certifications if not in incompliance with Rule 4:42-2, which is, in part, because of this court’s "repeated disapprov[al] of litigants’ attempts to use Rule 4:42-2 as a device to secure appellate review of an interlocutory order without moving for leave to appeal." Ibid. (citation omitted).