On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Burlington County, L-3984-04.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION
Argued December 20, 2006 -- Reserved Decision
Before Judges Stern and Lyons.
Re-Argued January 7, 2008
Before Judges Stern and Collester.
Plaintiff appeals from a judgment entered on March 29, 2005, granting summary judgment to the defendants after having permitted them to amend their answers to interrogatories following the discovery end date and to raise the verbal threshold. The complaint deals with an automobile accident which occurred on December 14, 2000. Defendant Merck is plaintiff's employer and defendant Castro was the driver of the vehicle leased to Merck. In response to form interrogatories, defendants did not attach a copy of Merck's policy. However, defendants identified the policy and its limits. After the discovery end date was extended and the trial date was adjourned to permit plaintiff to amend her answers to interrogatories to include treatment and surgery she had following the arbitration, defendants moved for summary judgment.*fn1 In their "statement of material facts," defendants asserted:
6. Plaintiff was diagnosed with scoliosis when she was young and had been treating with a chiropractor for years before the accident. Before the accident, plaintiff had been treating with a chiropractor more than once per month for at least a year for lower back pain.
7. On February 3, 2001, plaintiff underwent a MRI of the cervical spine the report of which says, "Review of the individual disc spaces shows no evidence of significant disc bulge, disc herniation or canal stenosis."
8. On February 24, 2001, plaintiff underwent a MRI of the brain, which revealed the following:
"MRI of the brain is normal."
(Internal citations to attached ...