If Injured, Make Sure Your Attorney Files a Notice of Claim Against All Possible Defendants Within 90 Days of the Injury |
Under the NJ Tort Claims Act, TCA, a claim of the type involved here cannot be brought against a public entity or public employee unless the procedural requirements of the Act have been followed. N.J.S.A. 59:8-3. The Act provides that [a] claim for injury or damages . . . against a local public entity shall be filed with that entity. N.J.S.A. 59:8-7. Regarding the time in which a claim must be presented, N.J.S.A. 59:8-8 provides: “A claim relating to a cause of action for death or for injury or damage to person or to property shall be presented as provided in this chapter not later than the ninetieth day after accrual of the cause of action. After the expiration of six months from the date notice of claim is received, the claimant may file suit in an appropriate court of law. The claimant shall be forever barred from recovering against a public entity or public employee if:
a. He failed to file his claim with the public entity within 90 days of accrual of his claim except as otherwise provided in section 59:8-9 . . . . (Emphasis added.) Regarding the filing of notice of late claim, N.J.S.A. 59:8-9 provides:
A claimant who fails to file notice of his claim within 90 days as provided in section 59:8-8 of this act, may, in the discretion of a judge of the Superior Court, be permitted to file such notice at any time within one year after the accrual of his claim provided that the public entity or the public employee has not been substantially prejudiced thereby. Application to the court for permission to file a late notice of claim shall be made upon motion supported by affidavits based upon personal knowledge of the affiant showing sufficient reasons constituting extraordinary circumstances for his failure to file notice of claim within the period of time prescribed by section 59:8-8 of this act or to file a motion seeking leave to file a late notice of claim within a reasonable time thereafter; provided that in no event may any suit against a public entity or a public employee arising under this act be filed later than two years from the time of the accrual of the claim.
The underlying purpose of the notice requirement set forth in N.J.S.A. 59:8-8 is to expedite investigation with the hope of reaching a nonjudicial settlement and to allow the public entity prompt access to information about the claim so that it may prepare a defense. Pilonero v. Twp. of Old Bridge, 236 N.J. Super. 529, 533 (App. Div. 1989). Specifically, the goals of the notice of claim provisions of the TCA are: (1) to allow the public entity at least six months for administrative review with the opportunity to settle meritorious claims prior to the bringing of suit; (2) to provide the public entity with prompt notification of a claim in order to adequately investigate the facts and prepare a defense; (3) to afford the public entity a chance to correct the conditions or practices which gave rise to the claim; and (4) to inform the [public entity] in advance as to the indebtedness or liability that it may be expected to meet.
[Henderson v. Herman, 373 N.J. Super. 625, 634 (App. Div. 2004) (quoting Beauchamp v. Amedio, 164 N.J. 111, 121-22 (2000)).]
The court said have emphasized that [t]he filing of a notice of claim more than 90 days after the accrual of a claim without leave of court is a nullity. Priore v. State, 190 N.J. Super. 127, 130 (App. Div. 1983), overruled on other grounds, Moon v. Warren Haven Nursing Home, 182 N.J. 507 (2005). The filing of a notice of claim after the ninety-day period without leave of the court does not confer jurisdiction upon the court to grant leave to file a late notice of claim beyond the one year period. Ibid. Thus, it is clear that a judge is powerless under the statute to exercise any discretion or to act after a period of one year has elapsed from the date on which the cause of action accrued, where application to the court by motion for permission to file a late notice of claim has not been made within the year.
[Fuller v. Rutgers, State Univ., 154 N.J. Super. 420, 423 (App. Div. 1977), certif. denied, 75 N.J. 610 (1978).]
|
To email Ken V, go here: http://www.njlaws.com/ContactKenV.html
Kenneth Vercammen is a Middlesex County Trial Attorney who has published 130 articles in national and New Jersey publications on Criminal Law, Probate, Estate and litigation topics.
He was awarded the NJ State State Bar Municipal Court Practitioner of the Year.
He lectures and handles criminal cases, Municipal Court, DWI, traffic and other litigation matters.
To schedule a confidential consultation, call us or New clients email us evenings and weekends via contact box www.njlaws.com.
Kenneth Vercammen & Associates, P.C,
2053 Woodbridge Avenue,
Edison, NJ 08817,
(732) 572-0500