Unlike a motion to dismiss, a motion to dismiss does not presume that the facts are true and requires the party making the motion to prove that there are no questions of fact for a jury to decide. In other literature, an application for summary judgment relies heavily on the facts of the case and supporting evidence. An application for dismissal and an application for summary judgment are both considered applications for dismissal. A request for disposition is used to settle a case. In other words, these motions ask the court to decide that the case must be closed before trial based on the information contained in the request. The fact that the two motions are determinative is where the similarities between the motions end. With the adoption of new Rule 4:25-8, the Court provides a framework for applications in limine filings by including in limine applications as part of the pre-trial exchange; set page restrictions; and, above all, to inform litigants of the possible negative consequences in the event of non-compliance with the rule. Most of us have come across the terms «application for rejection» and «application for summary ruling». You may have read it in a John Grisham novel or heard it in a movie like A Few Good Men or A Civil Action.
You may even have heard that it is used in news or other reality shows in connection with the real legal drama. Although many people have used these terms interchangeably, there is an important difference between a motion for dismissal and a motion for summary judgment. In this article, I explain how the two apps differ and what they could mean for your lawsuit. Failure to comply with this new rule could result in the trial court refusing to consider the application unless there is evidence of a valid reason for non-compliance. It is therefore essential that litigants familiarize themselves with the amended rules in order to understand how these changes may affect their case. A full copy of the Court`s amendments is available here. While both are considered motions to dismiss, an application for dismissal and an application for summary judgment differ significantly in format, analysis and outcome. These applications are very complex and should not be filed without the help of an experienced New Jersey attorney. Previously, requests for refusal for failure to provide a claim under Rule 4:6(2)(e) were filed in accordance with the general rule of application. Under the new amended Rule, a request for refusal under Rule 4:6(2)(e) for failure to indicate a claim must be filed in accordance with the longer time limit for requests for summary ruling under Rule 4:46(1). In other words, litigants must now move no later than 28 days before the scheduled return date, and appeals must be filed no later than 10 days before the return date.
The amendment is without prejudice to requests for refusal filed only under Rule 4:6-2(a) to (d) and (f). The rule also significantly modifies the practice of filing in limine applications by requiring in limine applications to be filed as evidence for pre-trial exchange under Rule 4:25-7(b), which requires that the exchange take place at least 7 days before the trial date. If more than one issue needs to be resolved, multiple requests must be submitted in the lead, as the new rule limits one point per request (as far as possible). In the first instance, applications are limited to five-page withdrawal and opposition briefs, and there is a collective limit of 50 pages for all applications filed by a single party, without a table of contents or authorizations. R. 4:25-8(a)(3). Replies to applications in limine shall not be admissible without leave of the Court. In response to a request for rejection under R. 4:6-2(e), the court must treat all factual allegations as true and carefully consider those allegations «to determine whether the basis of a cause of action may also be inferred from an obscure statement.» Printing Mart-Morristown v Sharp Elec.
Corp., 116 N.J. 739, 746 (1989). The new rule essentially codifies the involvement of Cho v. Trinitas Regional Medical Center, 443 N.J. Super. 461 (App. Div. 2015), certif. denied, 224 N.J. 529 (2016), in which it was clarified that litigants cannot file a request for a result, which, on the eve of the trial, is called an application in limine. The new rule defines an application in limine as «an application that may be referred to trial in order to make a decision on the conduct of the proceedings, including the admissibility of evidence, which, if approved, would have no material effect on a litigant`s case.» Rule 4:25-8(a)(1) provides that requests for rejection, such as a request to exclude expert testimony in a case where such testimony is necessary to bear a party`s burden of proof, no longer fall within the scope of online applications and are not considered.
Requests for dismissal must be filed in a timely manner and in accordance with Rule 4:46, which governs applications for summary rulings. `The judgment or order sought shall be made without delay if it appears from the pleadings, statements, responses to hearings and admissions to the file and, where appropriate, affidavits, that there is no genuine question concerning a material fact in dispute and that the requesting party is automatically entitled to a judgment or order.