Suchit v. Baxt

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that the rule is derived from Evid.R. 56(2)
• finding court rule establishing medical malpractice panel was procedural device in view of its incidental effect on substantive rights and express purpose— i.e., \expediting the disposition of cases\
• finding court rule establishing medical malpractice panel was procedural device in view of its incidental effect on substantive rights and express purpose — ie., “expediting the disposition of cases”
• rejecting access to courts claim against Court Rule 4:21, which then provided for medical malpractice screening panel

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).