Villanueva v. Zimmer
431 N.J. Super. 301
| N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. | 2013Background
- Plaintiff Rozelle A. Villanueva sues defendant Carmen DeRosa over a rear-end collision; Zimmer and others were preliminarily dismissed, and DeRosa stipulated liability, leaving proximate cause and damages for trial.
- SSA issued a June 24, 2007 Notice of Award finding Villanueva disabled as of October 28, 2005, with no accompanying findings of fact, and noting periodic review.
- Before trial, multiple in limine motions were raised; Villanueva’s counsel invoked SSA disability as injury proof, prompting trial court rulings.
- During opening statements, Villanueva referenced SSA disability; the court reserved ruling on admissibility and later ruled the SSA finding could not be used to create a presumption of permanent disability.
- At trial, defense doctors testified no objective injuries; plaintiff described back/neck pain and inability to work; the jury found no proximate injury proximately caused by the collision.
- On appeal, Villanueva contends the SSA determination should be admissible as presumptive evidence and usable in cross-examination; the court affirms exclusion and judgment for DeRosa.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of SSA disability determination | Golian allows presumptive disability from SSA; SSA should be admissible as evidence. | SSA determination is hearsay and not admissible under NJR.E. 803(c)(8) in a personal injury case. | SSA determination excluded; not admissible as evidence. |
| Presumptive effect of SSA finding | SSA finding creates a prima facie presumption of disability; defendant must rebut. | No presumption; Golian's approach is distinguishable and not controlling here. | No presumption applied; Golian limited and not controlling. |
| Cross-examination using SSA conclusions | Plaintiff should be allowed to cross-examine with SSA conclusions showing disability. | SSA conclusions are inadmissible hearsay and cannot be used to cross-examine experts. | Cross-examination with SSA conclusions not permitted. |
| Jury instruction regarding SSA determination | Jury should be instructed that SSA finding is presumptive evidence of disability and cannot be contradicted by testimony. | No such instruction; SSA finding should be excluded and not framed as a presumption. | Judge's instruction acknowledging SSA finding and its non-binding status was proper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Golian v. Golian, 344 N.J. Super. 337 (App.Div. 2001) (presumption of disability not controlling here; limited applicability)
- Olivieri v. Y.M.F. Carpet, Inc., 186 N.J. 511 (2006) (collateral estoppel not applicable; administrative findings subject to fairness concerns)
- Muench v. Twp. of Haddon, 255 N.J. Super. 288 (App.Div. 1992) (public records exception; limitations on official conclusions admissible as findings)
- Phillips v. Erie Lackawanna R.R. Co., 107 N.J. Super. 590 (App.Div. 1969) (official investigations; hearsay and rule-based exclusions for conclusions)
- Beech Aircraft v. Rainey, 488 U.S. 153 (1988) (public records and trustworthiness; foundational rule for official findings)
- State v. Rose, 206 N.J. 141 (2011) (hearsay exceptions and general evidentiary principles in New Jersey)