Mihaela Creanga and Radu Creanga, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. John R. Jardal, Jr., and Lucent Technologies…

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey held that the trial court erred in excluding the treating physician's expert testimony because it was based on a properly conducted differential diagnosis and was not a net opinion. The Court affirmed that differential diagnosis testimony is admissible under N.J.R.E. 702 and reversed the lower courts, remanding for reinstatement of the complaint.