Court Opinion

ID: 9696860
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-25 19:00:35.62131+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T12:27:43.152765
License: Public Domain

O’HERN, J.,
concurring in part, dissenting in part.
I concur in the majority’s well-reasoned analysis of the major substantive issues in the case. I cannot be “completely confident” that the improper submission to the jury of an invalid theory of liability (i.e., failure of a hospital to promulgate written procedures for physicians making medical decisions) did not affect the jury’s resolution of the hospital administrator’s liability for the delay in releasing the body. See Freund v. Cellofilm Properties, Inc., 87 N.J. 229, 245, 432 A.2d 925, 933 (1981) (uncertainty about basis of jury verdict warrants retrial of issues). Hence, I would order a retrial on all issues.
For affirmance in part and reversal in part — Chief Justice WILENTZ and Justices CLIFFORD, HANDLER, POLLOCK, GARIBALDI and STEIN — 6.
Concurring in part and dissenting in part — Justice O’HERN — 1.