clinical research program in the same specialty or subspecialty . . . ; or
(c) both.
[N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a) (emphasis added).]
In Nicholas, our Supreme Court explained N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a)'s
requirements where, as here, a plaintiff proffers an expert who is board
certified in a specialty and a subspecialty to testify about the care or treatment
A-5165-15T2 rendered by another physician in the same specialty and subspecialty. 6 213
N.J. at 479-88. The Court first noted that where "a physician is a specialist
and the basis of the malpractice action 'involves' the physician's specialty, the
challenging expert must practice in the same specialty." Id. at 481-82; accord
Castello, 446 N.J. Super. at 16. A plaintiff's expert "must be a specialist in the
same field in which the defendant physician specializes . . . ." Nicholas, 213
N.J. at 482; see N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a); see also Meehan, 226 N.J. at 233
(explaining N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a) requires that a "proposed expert . . . must
have specialized in the same specialty or subspecialty" as the defendant
physician).
N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a) imposes additional expert qualifications where a
defendant physician practices in an ABMS specialty and is also board certified
in the specialty. Nicholas, 213 N.J. at 482. The Court explained that "if the
defendant-physician specializes in a practice area 'and . . . is board certified
and the care or treatment at issue involves that board specialty . . . , the expert
witness' then must" satisfy the requirements of "either" N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-
Where the treatment at issue is not provided by a specialist, or is provided by a specialist but does not involve the physician's specialty, the requirements for the qualification of an expert to testify against a general practitioner apply. Buck, 207 N.J. at 391; see also N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(b). The standard has no application here because the defendant physicians were specialists in pediatrics and subspecialists in pediatric critical care and their alleged malpractice involved that specialty and subspecialty.
A-5165-15T2 41(a)(1) "or" N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a)(2). Ibid. (citation omitted); see also
Castello, 446 N.J. Super. at 15 (noting that where the defendant physician is
board certified in the specialty involved in the alleged malpractice , the
challenging expert must satisfy the requirements of N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a),
and "the additional qualifications set forth in subsections (a)(1) or (a)(2)");
Lomando v. United States, 667 F.3d 363, 383 (3d Cir. 2011) (finding N.J.S.A.
2A:53A-41(a) requires that an expert offering testimony against a board -
certified specialist share that specialty and meet the requirements of either
N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a)(1) or (a)(2)).
To satisfy N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a)(1)'s requirements, the expert must be
"credentialed by a hospital to treat the condition at issue . . . ." Nicholas, 213
N.J. at 482. To satisfy the requirements of N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41(a)(2), the
expert must be "board certified in the same specialty in the year preceding 'the
occurrence that is the basis for the claim or action,'" ibid. (quoting N.J.S.A.
2A:53A-41(a)(2)), and during the year immediately preceding the occurrence
he or she must have devoted a majority of his or her