top of page


NJ Appellate Division Limits Expert Testimony As To Malingering.

September 1, 2009

Share to:

In Brady v. Pulgar, the defendant appealed from a $12M verdict alleging in part that the trial court improperly barred the defense neurological expert from referring to the opinions of several non-testifying physicians who had concluded that the plaintiff was malingering. The Appellate Division held that because the defense expert had not relied on the diagnosis of malingering made by the other physicians, had not made the diagnosis in his own report and had testified at a deposition that he had not made any determination as to malingering, the trial court properly granted plaintiff's motion in limine preventing him from testifying about the opinions of the non-testifying experts.
<a href=""></a>

Headshot of Staff Member


bottom of page