Baskett v. KWOKLEUNG CHEUNG
28 A.3d 1255
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2011Background
- August 18, 2005 auto collision on Route 27 in Edison between Baskett and Cheung.
- Plaintiffs filed a six-count complaint against Cheung days before the two-year statute of limitations expired.
- Cheung was never personally served; a Rule 1:13-7(a) notice of future dismissal was issued but not received by plaintiffs’ counsel.
- Notice failed due to internal routing; designated trial attorney in Trenton did not receive the notice.
- February 27, 2008 the complaint was dismissed without prejudice for lack of prosecution; no immediate action followed for about two years.
- May 19, 2010 new counsel was substituted for plaintiffs; June 17, 2010 motion to reinstate filed; defendant opposed and moved to dismiss with prejudice; court denied reinstatement and reconsideration; appellate court reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standard for reinstatement after amendment | Good cause governs in single-defendant cases | Still requires prejudice or exceptional circumstances | Good cause applicable in single-defendant cases |
| Did plaintiffs show good cause to reinstate | Misconduct by prior counsel and lack of notice constitute good cause | Delay prejudices defendant; lack of progress | Court should reinstate given lack of fault by plaintiffs and lack of prejudice |
| Was there prejudice to defendant | No demonstrated prejudice; memories and records may be intact | Time lapse risks witness loss and evidence deterioration | No substantial prejudice proved; factors weighed in plaintiffs’ favor |
| Effect of 2008 Rule 1:13-7(a) amendments | Amendment liberalizes reinstatement for single defendant | Standard remains stringent when time elapses | Amendment proper; standard used was good cause for single-defendant cases |
| Whether reconsideration denial was erroneous | Ghandi v. Cespedes supports liberal restoration | Court correctly applied new standard and discretion | Reconsideration error; reversal appropriate |
Key Cases Cited
- Ghandi v. Cespedes, 390 N.J. Super. 193 (App.Div. 2007) (liberal restoration when no fault and no prejudice)
- Weber v. Mayan Palace Hotel & Resorts, 397 N.J. Super. 257 (App.Div. 2007) (abuse-of-discretion review for reinstatement denials)
- Frumer v. National Home Insurance Co., 420 N.J. Super. 7 (App.Div. 2011) (interpretation of legal consequences in undisputed facts)
- Alfano v. BDO Seidman, LLP, 393 N.J. Super. 560 (App.Div. 2007) (limits on application of law in appellate review)
- Manalapan Realty, L.P. v. Twp. Comm., 140 N.J. 366 (1995) (interpretation of administrative rule purposes)