Preview
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN
By: David S. Rochman, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990
103 Fairway Terrace
Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054
Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242
Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff(s)
TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
CAMDEN COUNTY
Plaintiff(s).
v
DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20
JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100)
(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and
unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION
and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified individual), :
NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS
INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC
CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified
corporation) Individually, jointly, severally
and in alternative NOTICE OF MOTION
IN LIMINE
Defendant
TO: Robert Nicodemo, III, Esq
PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 16, 2023, at 9:00 o’clock in the forenoon or as
soon thereafter as counsel may be heard the undersigned, attorney for Plaintiff(s), will apply
tothe Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County Hall of Justice, 101 South
Fifth Street, Camden, New Jersey 08103 or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for an
Order
1 Ruling on Plaintiff(s) objections of Howard Freedman, D.C.; and
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
2. For such other and further relief that the Court deem equitable and just.
In support of the within application, the undersigned shall rely upon the attached
Certification.
Pursuant to R. 1:6-2(d) the undersigned Plaintiff(s) requests oral argument if opposition is
filed.
A proposed form of Order is attached.
CT.
DAVID 'S. ROCHMAN, ESQUIRE
Attorney for Plaintiff(s)
DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2023
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN
By: David S. Rochman, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990
103 Fairway Terrace
Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054
Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242
Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff(s)
TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
CAMDEN COUNTY
Plaintiff(s)
V.
DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20
JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100)
(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and
unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS ‘CIVIL ACTION
and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified individual), :
NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS
INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC
CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified
corporation) Individually, jointly, severally
and in alternative ORDER
Defendant.
THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court by DAVID S. ROCHMAN,
ESQUIRE, attorney for Plaintiff(s), Teresa Ratkowiak, and the Court having considered the
moving papers; and good cause having been shown:
IT IS on this day of September, 2023, ORDERED as follows
1 Objections made by counsel for that of Plaintiff(s) of Howard Freedman, D.C.
are hereby resolved; and
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
2 A copy of this Order be served upon all counsel within seven (7) days from
the date hereof via E-Courts.
JS.C.
(_) Opposed
(_) Unopposed
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN
By: David S. Rochman, Esquire
Attorney ID. No.: 037871990
103 Fairway Terrace
Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054
Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242
Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff
TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
CAMDEN COUNTY
Plaintiff(s),
Vv
DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20
JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100) :
(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and
unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION
a JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for
resently unknown and unidentified individual), :
N \W JERSEY MANUFACTURER:
INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC
CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified
corporation) Individually, jointly, severally
and in alternative CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL
IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION
Defendant(s) IN LIMINE
I, David S. Rochman, Esquire, of full age, being duly sworn according to law, do hereby
certify as follows
1 Jam an attorney at law within the State of New Jersey, and have been retained to
represent the Plaintiff(s) in the above-captioned matter As such I am familiar with the facts
records and circumstances transpired to date
2 I submit this Certification in support of the Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion In Limine
and hereby place one (1) Deposition Transcript before the Court for resolvable objections as it
relates to that of the Plaintiff.
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
3 In addressing Howard Freedman, D.C.’s, Deposition taken on January 24, 2023,
(attached hereto as Exhibit A) I ask the Court to rule upon the following objections:
Page 29, line 22;
Page 30, line 2;
Page 33, line 13;
Page 38, line 5;
Page 46, lines 17 and 18;
Page 47, line 25;
Page 50, line 9 and lines 20 and 21;
Page 52, line 20;
Page 61, line 10;
Page 119 line 13;
Page 150, line 3;
Page 154, line 14;
Page 156, line 20;
Page 161, line 21;
Page 167, line 16;
Page 171, line 20;
Page 174, line 6.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it respectfully requested that the Court enter an Order
resolving Plaintiff's objections that of Howard Freedman, D.C.
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg3o0f3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true and correct to the best of my
knowledge. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I
am subject to punishment.
DAVIB’S. ROCHMAN, ESQUIRE
Attorney for Plaintiff
DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2023
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN
By: David S. Rochman, Esquire
Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990
103 Fairway Terrace
Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054
Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242
Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com
Attorney for Plaintiff(s)
TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY
LAW DIVISION
CAMDEN COUNTY
Plaintiff(s).
Vv
DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20
JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100)
(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and
unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION
and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified individual), :
NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS
INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC
CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for
a presently unknown and unidentified
corporation) Individually, jointly, severally
and in alternative PROOF OF SERVICE
Defendant
On September 27 ., 2023, a copy of the within Notice of Motion In Limine
Certification of David S. Rochman, Esquire, proposed Order and Proof of Service has been
filed with the Clerk of the Court via E-Courts and served upon the below in the manner as
follows
(Via E-Courts & Email: rrnicodemo@nicodemoandconnnell.com
Robert R. Nicodemo III, Esquire
108 Kings Highway East, Suite 210
Haddonfield, NJ 08033
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of
the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment.
A
Mary Carte) Legal Secretary to
David S. Ri an, Esquire
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
EXHIBIT A
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
8 (Pages 26 to 29)
Page 26 Page 28
MR. NICODEMO: David, I'm going to place brethren cite Ruiz and James -- James vs Ruiz,
an objection to the question. I believe that Agha and Braun for the wrong proposition.
what other courts may or may not have done would The Court said no, chiropractors can't.
not be evidential in this matter; and for that That is not what the Court said. The Court said
reason, I'm going to object. that chiropractors can't interpret -- I'm
MR. ROCHMAN: I believe that an expert's sorry -- they can't parrot the interpretation of
qualifications can come from all different a reading radiologist but when so qualified that
sources. the Court should accept them as such and again,
They can come from education. They can I believe this is just an extension l(a). I
10 come from training. They can come from a 10 understand counsel's objection.
11 court's recognition that individuals are, in 11 But, Hillary, please read back the
12 fact, so qualified. 12 question off the record and we will get the
13 The question -- and I understand your 13 Doctor to answer on the record, please.
14 objection. The question wasn't leading; it was 14 (The reporter read back the referred-to
15 open-ended. 15 portion of the record.)
16 And the Court, for the record, has to 16 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:01
17 make a determination in this regard whether or 17 back on the video record.
18 not the doctor is qualified to review and 18 BY MR. ROCHMAN: "s
19 interpret MRIs. 19 Q Please, Dr. Freedman, answer to the last
20 So] assume in the question that the 20 question.
21 doctor has been asked so similar type of inquiry 21 A I'm going to ask it to be repeated one
22 in the last how many years he had to testify and 22 more time.
23 therefore his answer does become relevant to the 23 Q Doctor, have you been qualified
24 Court. 24 previously, to your understanding, with an
25 Tt doesn't become controlling, but T 25 ability as a chiropractic doctor to read and
Page 27 Page 29
think it becomes relevant as it relates to the interpret MRIs through our court system?
establishment of his expertise. A Yes, have.
Just as I asked him without objection MR. ROCHMAN: Thank you.
has he been qualified as an expert in At this juncture, I would offer
chiropractic. Dr. Freedman as an expert in the field of
In fact, I believe that that is the chiropractic including but not limited to his
standard question. So this is from my ability to read and interpret from an expert
i
perspective a 1(a) question. i view and capacity MRIs and diagnostic studies,
Yes, you have been qualified and t X-rays, and the like.
10 accepted by the Court routinely in the field of 10 CROSS EXAMINATION AS.
11 chiropractic and this is the 1(a) to that, which 11 TO QUALIFICATIONS BY
12 is has that included radiographic 12 MR. NICODEMO:
13
14
interpretation.
For the record, we also know that once
| 13 Q
A
Good morning again, Doctor.
Good morning.
q 14
i5 the foundation is laid pursuant to Agha, Braun, i 15 Q You area chiropractor? Yes?
16 Ruiz, R-u-i-z, James, J-a-m-e-s, and people have 116 A That
is correct. Yes.
17 cited for the wrong proposition but our Supreme Lt Q And you are not a medical doctor; you
18 Court determined that when the foundation is 18 are not an M_D., correct?
19 laid -- and again, this is Supreme Court and 19 A That is correct.
20 this is what I believe is important for the 20 Q And you are not a doctor of osteopathic
al Court, the Supreme Court determined when the 21 medicine, a D.O., are you?
22 foundation is laid that the Court should 22 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection.
23 recognize and has recognized chiropractors as an 23 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is 11:02 off the
24 ability to interpret MRI films. 24 video record.
25 Most ‘ople -- not most, some of our 25 (Off the video record.)
DiPIERO COURT REPORTING
(215) 735-8101
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg3o0f15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
9 (Pages 30 to 33)
Page 30 Page 32
MR. ROCHMAN: How about if I have a medicine.
standing objection. Look, I do it. I know How about it I just have -- if you are
Robert is going to do it. I'm not saying it is going to persist -- and it is okay if you do, it
appropriate. is fine -- if [ have a standing objection,
I think the Court is going to have to Robert, to this line of inquiry.
make a determination. He is not offered as an MR. NICODEMO: You may but that was for
MD. the record, it was laid as a foundation as to
He is not offered as a doctor of where I'm going.
osteopathic medicine. He is offered as a doctor So if you want a standing objection to
10 of chiropractic medicine. 10 anything I ask him that he is not, I think you
11 Therefore, I believe the rules of voir 11 are going to find that I'm not going there.
12 dire that he has to be challenged if he is going 12 I'm going at this from a different
13 to be challenged in the field that he is 13 direction but your objection certainly is noted
14 offered. 14 and if I do ask if he is neurologist or a master
15 T think Robert and I -- and I say it all 15 plumber, your objection continues.
16 the time. I think Robert and I can agree that 16 MR. ROCHMAN: Very good.
17 he is not being offered and he shouldn't be 17 MR. NICODEMO: All right. We can go
. 18 challenged as a master plumber. 18 back on the record. ’
19 “Nobody should be questioning whether or | 19 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: One sec, One sec.
20 not he can fix my toilet in my basement that my 20 The time is 11:05. Back on the video
21 son apparently has not even clogged but has 21 record.
22 broken the main pump that it can't pump out. 22 BY MR. NICODEMO:
23 Be that as it may, he is not being 23 Q Now, Doctor, before we went off the
24 offered as a master plumber. He is being 24 record, just to ask you, as a chiropractor in
25 offered in tthe field of chiropractic. 25 the State of New Jersey. you would agree that
Page 31 Page 33
I believe that the voir dire and we all you were licensed by the New Jersey State Board
do it and J assume -- I don't know. I know of Chiropractic Examiners?
Robert a long time. A I'm actually licensed by the State
Jassume we are going to get into Medical Examiners when I got my license. There
everything else that he is not specialized was no Board of Chiropractic.
and/or vernacularized in, if that is a word, Q You would agree, however, that you are
vernacularized. Maybe Rochman just made that subject to the rules and regulations of the
one up. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners?
But look, I can stipulate that he is not A Yes.
10 an M.D. Ican stipulate that he is not an 10 Q So you had spoken earlier about scope of
11 osteopath. 11 practice. Scope of practice of a chiropractor
12 I can stipulate he is not a neurologist. 12 is governed by NJ AC 13:44B-1.17
13 Ican stipulate he is not a radiologist. He is 13 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection.
14 offered as he is offered. 14 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is 11:06. Off
15 And I -- look, I understand that I do it p15 the video record.
16 myself; but I'm not quite sure that it -- well, #16 (Off the video record.)
17 my position is it is not correct. $17 MR. ROCHMAN: Again, this -- sorry.
18 Voir dire is challenged of his 418 This may -- and emphasis is added with big may
19 credentials for what he is offered as. He 19 -- I'm not sure -- be fodder for Cross.
20 wasn't offered as an M.D. He wasn't offered as 20 But again, to call into the doctor as to
21 an osteopath, 721 his scope of credentialing and to just then set
22 He is not offered as a neurologist. He 22 forth a particular administrative code cite I
23. is not offered as a radiologist. He is offered 23 think is highly inappropriate in voir dire.
24 as a chiropractor with a field and expertise in )24 Give me the cite again, NJ AC?
25 radiographic interpretation and chiropractic 25 MR. NICODEMO: 13:44E-1.1,
DiPIERO COURT REPORTING
(215) FS5-810L
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg4of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
11 (Pages 38 to 41)
Page 38 Page 40
nowhere in the rules and regulations that you can object. You can have that objection on that
must follow with respect to scope of practice issue.
are you, as a chiropractor, permitted to I need to ask my questions and get
interpret MRI films? answers from the doctor. And should you be
MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. correct and you may be correct, I would disagree
VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is now 11:13. but if you were -- if the judge rules that you
Off the video record. are correct, then merely these questions that
(Off the video record.) are deemed to be inappropriate will be redacted
MR. ROCHMAN: I have read the Act. The and we will proceed.
10 Act is silent on the issue. And therefore, 10 MR. ROCHMAN: Well, but you are not
11 there is nothing to suggest that he is not. 11 allowed to ask the doctor if he stood on a
12 Counsel can't put anything in the record 12 grassy knoll in 1962 with a high-powered rifle.
13 that indicates that he cannot; and as I have 13 You are not allowed and there is some
14 indicated, counsel is now, I think, 14 ethics responsibilities here to ask something
15 inappropriately, and I think he is moving closer 15 that you know to be incorrect.
16 to the edge of violating in his voir dire our 16 And if you are stating on the record --
17 caselaw. Le you are not under oath but if you adamantly
A8 As l indicated earlier, our Supreme, 18 believe that chiropractors have been denied the,
19 Court which governs this question in James 19 right in court to interpret, I would -- to
20 versus Ruiz indicated that a chiropractor can 20 interpret, I would ask you to provide that case.
21: interpret, has the ability to interpret. 21 I just provided --
22 So again, what am I supposed to do? 22 MR. NICODEMO: David --
23 Doctor, are you familiar with James versus Ruiz? 23. MR. ROCHMAN: Hold on. Hold on. I just
24 THE WITNESS: I'm not. 24 provided the case that J rely on that says that
25 MR. ROCHMAN: No. No. I'm speaking t 25 they can.
Page 39 Page 41
the record. So I will ask the Court for an offer at
MR. NICODEMO: He is just speaking. this point in time because I think this has
MR. ROCHMAN: I'm speaking to the become vexation -- vexing and harassing.
record. Doctor, are you familiar with James I'm going to ask Mr. Nicodemo to support
versus Ruiz? his conclusion that -- since he is raising this,
Doctor, isn't it true that James versus he is clearly of the opinion that a chiropractor
Ruiz says that chiropractor may interpret and cannot interpret, which, by the way, makes
provide an interpretation of MRIs that goes absolutely no sense, right, can't interpret
squarely within the scope of the legal purview. something he can order.
10 That is what James says. 10 He can't order laboratory because he is
il MR. NICODEMO; I disagree with that, 11 ‘ot allowed to interpret it. Right? And that
12 David. I disagree with that interpretation. It yl2 is clear.
13 is your legal interpretation and these are I mean, he can't order medication
14 issues that are going to be put before the trial because he doesn't interpret it. But to say
15 judge. fis that you can order something and then your
16 i 16
If you remember, David, as I'm sure you regulatory confine is silent on the
17 know and I say this tongue in cheek because 1 ,17 interpretation and not to Cross him on it is
18 don't want the record to suggest that I was 18 just silly and baseless.
19 being nasty, but I say it tongue in cheek. 19 Again, I will ask at this juncture and I
20 As you know, this is our opportunity to 20 would in court. So this is trial testimony.
21 getall of our questions onto the record in the 21 Mr. Nicodemo is correct.
22 video and that videos can be and are regularly 22 And I love our spirited debate this
23 redacted based upon rulings by the trial judge, 23 morning, Robert. It is fantastic.
24 which will be ata later date. 24 MR. NICODEMO: All right. Can I jump in
25 So I would - I'm of the position -- you 25 here?
DiPIERO COURT REPORTING
(215) 735-8101
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg5of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
13 (Pages 46 to 49)
Page 46 Page 48
to let you do that. I'm going to be heard. VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:25.
MR. NICODEMO: Of course. I think you Off the video record.
have been heard. The record is going to reflect (Off the video record.)
that. MR. ROCHMAN: Rule 61 1(a)
and (b) ~
MR. ROCHMAN: You can save those sorry. Rule 611(a) and (b). It is the same
breaths, Nobody is going to corral me. And question he just answered.
again, if the Act is silent, again, you have to MR. NICODEMO: He answered part of it.
read the Act as it is stated. T have to rephrase the question, David.
And there is no prohibition. There is MR. ROCHMAN: No, you didn't. It is the
10 prohibition in other Acts for chiropractic 10 same the question.
11 within the Act. 11 ‘Was the car blue? Doc, was the car
12 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. Now, Hillary, can 12 really blue? Was it really, really blue? I
13 you find that last question? 13 vehemently object, as in a Few Good Men. So you
14 (The reporter read back the referred-to 14 mean you object more than object.
15 portion of the record.) 15 Itis the same question. It wasn't
16 MR. NICODEMO; Okay. We can go back on. 16 rephrased. It was the same question, which he
17 MR. ROCHMAN: Just on the record, you 17 has already answered,
18 will note my further objection. The doctor said ’ 18 MR. NICODEMO:, Okay. I'm goingto have
19 he doesn't have committed to memory the Act, 19 him answer it, and then you can move to redact
20 So be that as it may, I think it also 20 it.
21 assumes facts and it hasn't established facts 21. Doctor, are you ready to proceed or do
22 that the question relies on. Be that as it may, 22 you want it read back?
23 go ahead. 23 THE WITNESS: Where are we going?
24 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Give me one sec. One 24 MR. ROCHMAN: Stop. Stop. Maybe moving
25 sec. 25 forward at NJM's expense at this point, Go
Basie shee ee
Page 47 Page 49
The time is 11:23. Back on the video ahead.
record. MR. NICODEMO: Hillary, do you want to
BY MR. NICODEMO: read that back, the last question to the doctor
Q Doctor, can you answer the question? so he can answer it.
A I'msorry. I'm going to need it (The reporter read back the referred-to
repeated. I'm sorry. portion of the record.)
Q Okay. Let's do it this way, then. Are MR. ROCHMAN: We have to go back on the
you aware of -- and I'll rephrase it. video before you answer, Doc.
Are you aware of any provision in the VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:27.
10 State Board of Chiropractor Examiners of New $10 Back on the video record.
11 Jersey's rules or regulations which specifically fia BY MR. NICODEMO;:
12 permit a licensed chiropractor in the State of ji2 Q Okay. Doctor, are you able to answer
13 New Jersey to read and interpret MRI films? f 13 that question?
ue A [can't necessarily say along the lines 14 A The way I can answer this is that if the
15 of the New Jersey Board of Chiropractic. 15 New Jersey Board of Chiropractic basically sets
16 However, I do have extensive postgraduate 16 the guidelines for what chiropractors can and
17 education in MRI interpretation with 17 cannot do, I would imagine that that would also
18 certification in my ability to interpret and 18 allow them the ability to negate what our state
19 read MRIs. 19 society, the Association of New Jersey
20 Q Okay. So as we sit here today, you are 20 Chiropractors, has basically provided various
21 not able to cite to us any specific provision ai educational seminars to offer those who take the
22 under the scope of practice of chiropractors in 22 course to do an extensive amount of MRI reading
23 the state, which would specifically allow you to 23 and interpretation and get certification in
24 interpret MRI films? 24 that.
25 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. 25 Q Okay.
DiPIERO COURT REPORTING
(21.5) 735-8101
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg6o0f15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
14 (Pages 50 to 53)
Page 50 Page 52
A So-- (The reporter read back the referred-to
Q Okay. Let's shift gears then, Doctor, portion of the record.)
A Um-hum. VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Give me one sec. One
Q You have given some testimony earlier sec,
about doing this type of work. How frequently . Time is 11:30, Back on the video
do you provide testimony in auto accident cases, record,
such as you are doing here today? BY MR. NICODEMO:
A Um-hum. Q Doctor, can you answer the question?
MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. You know what? A Inmy -- in my experience, I can
10 Objection withdrawn. Go ahead. 10 estimate that I have testified in depositions
11 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:28. 11 and trials approximately three to four dozen
12 We are off the record, 12 times in my career.
13 (Off the video record.) 13 Q And, Doctor, when you have been called
14 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: You want to go back 14 upon to provide that testimony, is it generally
18 on. 15 on behalf
of your patients?
16 MR. ROCHMAN: Hold on. Hold on. Hill, 16 A Yes.
17 read the question back then. 17 Q When you are called upon to testify, are
18 s (The reporter read back the referred-to 18 you, compensated for the time that you spend in
19 portion of the record.) 19 providing the testimony?
20 MR. ROCHMAN: All right. I'm going to 20 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection.
21 stand on my objection, Number one, it is beyond 21 MR. NICODEMO: I'm sorry.
22 the scope of direct. 22 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:31.
23 He wasn't asked -- he was asked whether 23 Off the video record.
24 or not he was qualified by courts, He was asked 24 (Off the video record.)
2 So whether or not he investigated and treated 25 MR. ROCHMAN: Who is the trial judge in
ao a se
Page 51 Page 53
people as it relates to response for injuries in Ratkowiak, Mer? Please get that for me.
motor vehicle accidents. Nothing to do with This is not appropriate voir dire. It
testifying. wasn't raised on Direct. And in fact, there is
And number two, it does not go to his a Supreme Court case right on point that
qualifications. His testimony wasn't part of -- indicates that you can't even ask this question
in fact, I didn't ask him one question about his in Cross.
testimony as qualifying him for an expert. You can't go to compensation anymore.
So I believe that the question is You can only go to percentage. And the question
inappropriate; and at this point in time, I was argumentative on top due to the fact that it
10 would move for sanctions against counsel and NJM | 10 suggested that he was -- Hill, read it back.
11 and I will continue to do that and I will put it 11 Sorry.
12 in my motion to resolve this. This is a 12 (The reporter read back the referred-to
13 frivolous voir dire. 13 portion of the record.)
14 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. I disagree. We 14 MR. ROCHMAN: It is formulated in the
15 can continue, i 15 question. All right. It is not appropriate in
16 MR. ROCHMAN: You can disagree all you | 16 voir dire.
17 want. You are not seven foot tall and dunk y17 Doe, hold on, please. May I have Judge
18 baskets in the NBA, neither one of us are. So 118 Stein's telephone number, please. Excuse me?
19 your disagreement with my assessment is #19 All right. Doc, let's take a break for
20 irrelevant. 20 asecond, I have had about all I'm going to
21 MR. NICODEMO: Well, I'm puiting that on 21 take -- not your fault, Doc, but I'm going to
22 the record so we have that. 22 try to puta stop to this. [have had all I'm
23 MR. ROCHMAN: All right. 23 going to take in this regard.
24 MR. NICODEMO: Hillary, do you want to 24 THE REPORTER: Are we slaying on the
25 read back that question? 925 record?
DiPIERO COURT REPORTING
(215) 735-8101
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg7of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843
HOWARD FREEDMAN
iS (Pages 54 to 57)
Page 54 Page 56
MR. NICODEMO: Yes. Yes. Dr. Freedman currently being examined.
MR. ROCHMAN: You can leave that on the LAW CLERE: Allright. Thank you.
record. I have had all that I'm going to take MR. ROCHMAN: Allright. So let's go
and I'm going to try to get Judge Stein to weigh back on the record.
in on it, this inappropriate voir dire. MR. NICODEMO: Before we do, I do want
Dog, let's take a break for a second. to add something on the written record.
Come off the video, We can't talk. You are Hillary, are you ready?
under your auspices of your testimony and take THE REPORTER: I have been going through
your -- put yourself on mute, please. that whole conversation.
10 THE WITNESS: Okay. Sure. 10 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. In response to
11 LAW CLERK: Judge Stein's chambers. li Mr. Rochman's objection concerning testimony
12 MR. ROCHMAN: Yes. Judge's law clerk? 12 about the doctor's fee, I will cite the model
13 David Rochman. How are you? 13 jury charge 1.13(c), the amount of the
14 LAW CLERK: Good. How are you? 14 expert's -- the expert witness's fee is a matter
15: MR. ROCHMAN: I don't know if it was 1s that you may consider as possibly affecting the
16 relayed to you what is going on. 16 believability of an expert.
17 LAW CLERK: No. She hasn't told me. 17 And [ would submit that believability
18 MR. ROCHMAN: All tight. I'm in ade, 18 and credibility and qualifications.fit under the
19 bene esse of my expert in the matter of 19 same umbrella; and for that reason, I think it
20 Ratkowiak versus Alston, Docket No. CAM-1129-20. 20 is appropriate.
21 Case is listed for pre-trial conference 21 And even if a court were to rule that it
22 with memos due next Monday and pick a jury the 22 is not, it is certainly permissible at any point
23 following Monday, which, hopefully, I think we 23 in further Cross Examination.
24 do. 24 MR. ROCHMAN: So in response,
25 Tim putting my chiropractic expert on 25 Mr. Nicodemo apparently is now going to get into
Page 55 Page 57
video. I have just qualified him and my a habit that he believes his own rhetoric and he
adversary has sought to Cross him on lieves his own conflation.
qualifications on compensation. That rule and that jury charge is as it
My perspective, it is highly relates to an expert's testimony, not an
inappropriate. It is improper. And I'm trying expert's credentials or his voir dire.
to put -- and it has been more contentious than ‘There is nothing in that charge that
that. talks about his qualifications. And again, we
And my adversary can hear and the court have rules of procedure.
reporter can hear. It has been more contentious I'll take the assumption that
10 than that. 10 Mr. Nicodemo just put on the record to be such
11 T'm trying to put a stop to it. As I a1 that I -- I could do this in Cross Examination.
12 put on the record, I reached my fill of what I 12 He is right. He can Cross the doctor.
13 consider to be inappropriate. #13 He is wrong, he can do it in voir dire and he is
14 LAW CLERK: Allright. I'll relay to (14 wrong, we have a Supreme Court announcement
15 the judge. I can't give you any information or pis which I will provide the Court that he can't ask
16 any sort of recommendation.
Preview
CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN By: David S. Rochman, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990 103 Fairway Terrace Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242 Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff(s) TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION CAMDEN COUNTY Plaintiff(s). v DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20 JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100) (a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual), : NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified corporation) Individually, jointly, severally and in alternative NOTICE OF MOTION IN LIMINE Defendant TO: Robert Nicodemo, III, Esq PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on October 16, 2023, at 9:00 o’clock in the forenoon or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard the undersigned, attorney for Plaintiff(s), will apply tothe Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County Hall of Justice, 101 South Fifth Street, Camden, New Jersey 08103 or as soon thereafter as counsel may be heard for an Order 1 Ruling on Plaintiff(s) objections of Howard Freedman, D.C.; and CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 2. For such other and further relief that the Court deem equitable and just. In support of the within application, the undersigned shall rely upon the attached Certification. Pursuant to R. 1:6-2(d) the undersigned Plaintiff(s) requests oral argument if opposition is filed. A proposed form of Order is attached. CT. DAVID 'S. ROCHMAN, ESQUIRE Attorney for Plaintiff(s) DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN By: David S. Rochman, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990 103 Fairway Terrace Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242 Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff(s) TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION CAMDEN COUNTY Plaintiff(s) V. DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20 JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100) (a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS ‘CIVIL ACTION and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual), : NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified corporation) Individually, jointly, severally and in alternative ORDER Defendant. THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court by DAVID S. ROCHMAN, ESQUIRE, attorney for Plaintiff(s), Teresa Ratkowiak, and the Court having considered the moving papers; and good cause having been shown: IT IS on this day of September, 2023, ORDERED as follows 1 Objections made by counsel for that of Plaintiff(s) of Howard Freedman, D.C. are hereby resolved; and CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 2 A copy of this Order be served upon all counsel within seven (7) days from the date hereof via E-Courts. JS.C. (_) Opposed (_) Unopposed CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN By: David S. Rochman, Esquire Attorney ID. No.: 037871990 103 Fairway Terrace Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242 Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION CAMDEN COUNTY Plaintiff(s), Vv DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20 JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100) : (a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION a JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for resently unknown and unidentified individual), : N \W JERSEY MANUFACTURER: INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified corporation) Individually, jointly, severally and in alternative CERTIFICATION OF COUNSEL IN SUPPORT OF NOTICE OF MOTION Defendant(s) IN LIMINE I, David S. Rochman, Esquire, of full age, being duly sworn according to law, do hereby certify as follows 1 Jam an attorney at law within the State of New Jersey, and have been retained to represent the Plaintiff(s) in the above-captioned matter As such I am familiar with the facts records and circumstances transpired to date 2 I submit this Certification in support of the Plaintiff’s Notice of Motion In Limine and hereby place one (1) Deposition Transcript before the Court for resolvable objections as it relates to that of the Plaintiff. CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 3 In addressing Howard Freedman, D.C.’s, Deposition taken on January 24, 2023, (attached hereto as Exhibit A) I ask the Court to rule upon the following objections: Page 29, line 22; Page 30, line 2; Page 33, line 13; Page 38, line 5; Page 46, lines 17 and 18; Page 47, line 25; Page 50, line 9 and lines 20 and 21; Page 52, line 20; Page 61, line 10; Page 119 line 13; Page 150, line 3; Page 154, line 14; Page 156, line 20; Page 161, line 21; Page 167, line 16; Page 171, line 20; Page 174, line 6. CONCLUSION For the foregoing reasons, it respectfully requested that the Court enter an Order resolving Plaintiff's objections that of Howard Freedman, D.C. CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg3o0f3 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true and correct to the best of my knowledge. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. DAVIB’S. ROCHMAN, ESQUIRE Attorney for Plaintiff DATED: SEPTEMBER 26, 2023 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 LAW OFFICE OF DAVID S. ROCHMAN By: David S. Rochman, Esquire Attorney I.D. No.: 037871990 103 Fairway Terrace Mount Laurel, New Jersey 08054 Tel.: (856) 751-2354; Fax: (856) 751-0242 Email: davidrochman@rochmanlaw.com Attorney for Plaintiff(s) TERESA RATKOWIAK SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY LAW DIVISION CAMDEN COUNTY Plaintiff(s). Vv DOCKET NO.CAM-L-1129-20 JAVON ALSTON and/or JOHN DOE(s) (1-100) (a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual) SHABREYA SIMMONS :CIVIL ACTION and/or JANE DOE (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified individual), : NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY and/or ABC CORPORATION (1-100)(a fictitious name for a presently unknown and unidentified corporation) Individually, jointly, severally and in alternative PROOF OF SERVICE Defendant On September 27 ., 2023, a copy of the within Notice of Motion In Limine Certification of David S. Rochman, Esquire, proposed Order and Proof of Service has been filed with the Clerk of the Court via E-Courts and served upon the below in the manner as follows (Via E-Courts & Email: rrnicodemo@nicodemoandconnnell.com Robert R. Nicodemo III, Esquire 108 Kings Highway East, Suite 210 Haddonfield, NJ 08033 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of2 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 I certify that the foregoing statements made by me are true. I am aware that if any of the foregoing statements made by me are willfully false, I am subject to punishment. A Mary Carte) Legal Secretary to David S. Ri an, Esquire CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pglof15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 EXHIBIT A CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg2of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN 8 (Pages 26 to 29) Page 26 Page 28 MR. NICODEMO: David, I'm going to place brethren cite Ruiz and James -- James vs Ruiz, an objection to the question. I believe that Agha and Braun for the wrong proposition. what other courts may or may not have done would The Court said no, chiropractors can't. not be evidential in this matter; and for that That is not what the Court said. The Court said reason, I'm going to object. that chiropractors can't interpret -- I'm MR. ROCHMAN: I believe that an expert's sorry -- they can't parrot the interpretation of qualifications can come from all different a reading radiologist but when so qualified that sources. the Court should accept them as such and again, They can come from education. They can I believe this is just an extension l(a). I 10 come from training. They can come from a 10 understand counsel's objection. 11 court's recognition that individuals are, in 11 But, Hillary, please read back the 12 fact, so qualified. 12 question off the record and we will get the 13 The question -- and I understand your 13 Doctor to answer on the record, please. 14 objection. The question wasn't leading; it was 14 (The reporter read back the referred-to 15 open-ended. 15 portion of the record.) 16 And the Court, for the record, has to 16 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:01 17 make a determination in this regard whether or 17 back on the video record. 18 not the doctor is qualified to review and 18 BY MR. ROCHMAN: "s 19 interpret MRIs. 19 Q Please, Dr. Freedman, answer to the last 20 So] assume in the question that the 20 question. 21 doctor has been asked so similar type of inquiry 21 A I'm going to ask it to be repeated one 22 in the last how many years he had to testify and 22 more time. 23 therefore his answer does become relevant to the 23 Q Doctor, have you been qualified 24 Court. 24 previously, to your understanding, with an 25 Tt doesn't become controlling, but T 25 ability as a chiropractic doctor to read and Page 27 Page 29 think it becomes relevant as it relates to the interpret MRIs through our court system? establishment of his expertise. A Yes, have. Just as I asked him without objection MR. ROCHMAN: Thank you. has he been qualified as an expert in At this juncture, I would offer chiropractic. Dr. Freedman as an expert in the field of In fact, I believe that that is the chiropractic including but not limited to his standard question. So this is from my ability to read and interpret from an expert i perspective a 1(a) question. i view and capacity MRIs and diagnostic studies, Yes, you have been qualified and t X-rays, and the like. 10 accepted by the Court routinely in the field of 10 CROSS EXAMINATION AS. 11 chiropractic and this is the 1(a) to that, which 11 TO QUALIFICATIONS BY 12 is has that included radiographic 12 MR. NICODEMO: 13 14 interpretation. For the record, we also know that once | 13 Q A Good morning again, Doctor. Good morning. q 14 i5 the foundation is laid pursuant to Agha, Braun, i 15 Q You area chiropractor? Yes? 16 Ruiz, R-u-i-z, James, J-a-m-e-s, and people have 116 A That is correct. Yes. 17 cited for the wrong proposition but our Supreme Lt Q And you are not a medical doctor; you 18 Court determined that when the foundation is 18 are not an M_D., correct? 19 laid -- and again, this is Supreme Court and 19 A That is correct. 20 this is what I believe is important for the 20 Q And you are not a doctor of osteopathic al Court, the Supreme Court determined when the 21 medicine, a D.O., are you? 22 foundation is laid that the Court should 22 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. 23 recognize and has recognized chiropractors as an 23 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is 11:02 off the 24 ability to interpret MRI films. 24 video record. 25 Most ‘ople -- not most, some of our 25 (Off the video record.) DiPIERO COURT REPORTING (215) 735-8101 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg3o0f15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN 9 (Pages 30 to 33) Page 30 Page 32 MR. ROCHMAN: How about if I have a medicine. standing objection. Look, I do it. I know How about it I just have -- if you are Robert is going to do it. I'm not saying it is going to persist -- and it is okay if you do, it appropriate. is fine -- if [ have a standing objection, I think the Court is going to have to Robert, to this line of inquiry. make a determination. He is not offered as an MR. NICODEMO: You may but that was for MD. the record, it was laid as a foundation as to He is not offered as a doctor of where I'm going. osteopathic medicine. He is offered as a doctor So if you want a standing objection to 10 of chiropractic medicine. 10 anything I ask him that he is not, I think you 11 Therefore, I believe the rules of voir 11 are going to find that I'm not going there. 12 dire that he has to be challenged if he is going 12 I'm going at this from a different 13 to be challenged in the field that he is 13 direction but your objection certainly is noted 14 offered. 14 and if I do ask if he is neurologist or a master 15 T think Robert and I -- and I say it all 15 plumber, your objection continues. 16 the time. I think Robert and I can agree that 16 MR. ROCHMAN: Very good. 17 he is not being offered and he shouldn't be 17 MR. NICODEMO: All right. We can go . 18 challenged as a master plumber. 18 back on the record. ’ 19 “Nobody should be questioning whether or | 19 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: One sec, One sec. 20 not he can fix my toilet in my basement that my 20 The time is 11:05. Back on the video 21 son apparently has not even clogged but has 21 record. 22 broken the main pump that it can't pump out. 22 BY MR. NICODEMO: 23 Be that as it may, he is not being 23 Q Now, Doctor, before we went off the 24 offered as a master plumber. He is being 24 record, just to ask you, as a chiropractor in 25 offered in tthe field of chiropractic. 25 the State of New Jersey. you would agree that Page 31 Page 33 I believe that the voir dire and we all you were licensed by the New Jersey State Board do it and J assume -- I don't know. I know of Chiropractic Examiners? Robert a long time. A I'm actually licensed by the State Jassume we are going to get into Medical Examiners when I got my license. There everything else that he is not specialized was no Board of Chiropractic. and/or vernacularized in, if that is a word, Q You would agree, however, that you are vernacularized. Maybe Rochman just made that subject to the rules and regulations of the one up. State Board of Chiropractic Examiners? But look, I can stipulate that he is not A Yes. 10 an M.D. Ican stipulate that he is not an 10 Q So you had spoken earlier about scope of 11 osteopath. 11 practice. Scope of practice of a chiropractor 12 I can stipulate he is not a neurologist. 12 is governed by NJ AC 13:44B-1.17 13 Ican stipulate he is not a radiologist. He is 13 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. 14 offered as he is offered. 14 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is 11:06. Off 15 And I -- look, I understand that I do it p15 the video record. 16 myself; but I'm not quite sure that it -- well, #16 (Off the video record.) 17 my position is it is not correct. $17 MR. ROCHMAN: Again, this -- sorry. 18 Voir dire is challenged of his 418 This may -- and emphasis is added with big may 19 credentials for what he is offered as. He 19 -- I'm not sure -- be fodder for Cross. 20 wasn't offered as an M.D. He wasn't offered as 20 But again, to call into the doctor as to 21 an osteopath, 721 his scope of credentialing and to just then set 22 He is not offered as a neurologist. He 22 forth a particular administrative code cite I 23. is not offered as a radiologist. He is offered 23 think is highly inappropriate in voir dire. 24 as a chiropractor with a field and expertise in )24 Give me the cite again, NJ AC? 25 radiographic interpretation and chiropractic 25 MR. NICODEMO: 13:44E-1.1, DiPIERO COURT REPORTING (215) FS5-810L CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg4of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN 11 (Pages 38 to 41) Page 38 Page 40 nowhere in the rules and regulations that you can object. You can have that objection on that must follow with respect to scope of practice issue. are you, as a chiropractor, permitted to I need to ask my questions and get interpret MRI films? answers from the doctor. And should you be MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. correct and you may be correct, I would disagree VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Time is now 11:13. but if you were -- if the judge rules that you Off the video record. are correct, then merely these questions that (Off the video record.) are deemed to be inappropriate will be redacted MR. ROCHMAN: I have read the Act. The and we will proceed. 10 Act is silent on the issue. And therefore, 10 MR. ROCHMAN: Well, but you are not 11 there is nothing to suggest that he is not. 11 allowed to ask the doctor if he stood on a 12 Counsel can't put anything in the record 12 grassy knoll in 1962 with a high-powered rifle. 13 that indicates that he cannot; and as I have 13 You are not allowed and there is some 14 indicated, counsel is now, I think, 14 ethics responsibilities here to ask something 15 inappropriately, and I think he is moving closer 15 that you know to be incorrect. 16 to the edge of violating in his voir dire our 16 And if you are stating on the record -- 17 caselaw. Le you are not under oath but if you adamantly A8 As l indicated earlier, our Supreme, 18 believe that chiropractors have been denied the, 19 Court which governs this question in James 19 right in court to interpret, I would -- to 20 versus Ruiz indicated that a chiropractor can 20 interpret, I would ask you to provide that case. 21: interpret, has the ability to interpret. 21 I just provided -- 22 So again, what am I supposed to do? 22 MR. NICODEMO: David -- 23 Doctor, are you familiar with James versus Ruiz? 23. MR. ROCHMAN: Hold on. Hold on. I just 24 THE WITNESS: I'm not. 24 provided the case that J rely on that says that 25 MR. ROCHMAN: No. No. I'm speaking t 25 they can. Page 39 Page 41 the record. So I will ask the Court for an offer at MR. NICODEMO: He is just speaking. this point in time because I think this has MR. ROCHMAN: I'm speaking to the become vexation -- vexing and harassing. record. Doctor, are you familiar with James I'm going to ask Mr. Nicodemo to support versus Ruiz? his conclusion that -- since he is raising this, Doctor, isn't it true that James versus he is clearly of the opinion that a chiropractor Ruiz says that chiropractor may interpret and cannot interpret, which, by the way, makes provide an interpretation of MRIs that goes absolutely no sense, right, can't interpret squarely within the scope of the legal purview. something he can order. 10 That is what James says. 10 He can't order laboratory because he is il MR. NICODEMO; I disagree with that, 11 ‘ot allowed to interpret it. Right? And that 12 David. I disagree with that interpretation. It yl2 is clear. 13 is your legal interpretation and these are I mean, he can't order medication 14 issues that are going to be put before the trial because he doesn't interpret it. But to say 15 judge. fis that you can order something and then your 16 i 16 If you remember, David, as I'm sure you regulatory confine is silent on the 17 know and I say this tongue in cheek because 1 ,17 interpretation and not to Cross him on it is 18 don't want the record to suggest that I was 18 just silly and baseless. 19 being nasty, but I say it tongue in cheek. 19 Again, I will ask at this juncture and I 20 As you know, this is our opportunity to 20 would in court. So this is trial testimony. 21 getall of our questions onto the record in the 21 Mr. Nicodemo is correct. 22 video and that videos can be and are regularly 22 And I love our spirited debate this 23 redacted based upon rulings by the trial judge, 23 morning, Robert. It is fantastic. 24 which will be ata later date. 24 MR. NICODEMO: All right. Can I jump in 25 So I would - I'm of the position -- you 25 here? DiPIERO COURT REPORTING (215) 735-8101 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg5of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN 13 (Pages 46 to 49) Page 46 Page 48 to let you do that. I'm going to be heard. VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:25. MR. NICODEMO: Of course. I think you Off the video record. have been heard. The record is going to reflect (Off the video record.) that. MR. ROCHMAN: Rule 61 1(a) and (b) ~ MR. ROCHMAN: You can save those sorry. Rule 611(a) and (b). It is the same breaths, Nobody is going to corral me. And question he just answered. again, if the Act is silent, again, you have to MR. NICODEMO: He answered part of it. read the Act as it is stated. T have to rephrase the question, David. And there is no prohibition. There is MR. ROCHMAN: No, you didn't. It is the 10 prohibition in other Acts for chiropractic 10 same the question. 11 within the Act. 11 ‘Was the car blue? Doc, was the car 12 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. Now, Hillary, can 12 really blue? Was it really, really blue? I 13 you find that last question? 13 vehemently object, as in a Few Good Men. So you 14 (The reporter read back the referred-to 14 mean you object more than object. 15 portion of the record.) 15 Itis the same question. It wasn't 16 MR. NICODEMO; Okay. We can go back on. 16 rephrased. It was the same question, which he 17 MR. ROCHMAN: Just on the record, you 17 has already answered, 18 will note my further objection. The doctor said ’ 18 MR. NICODEMO:, Okay. I'm goingto have 19 he doesn't have committed to memory the Act, 19 him answer it, and then you can move to redact 20 So be that as it may, I think it also 20 it. 21 assumes facts and it hasn't established facts 21. Doctor, are you ready to proceed or do 22 that the question relies on. Be that as it may, 22 you want it read back? 23 go ahead. 23 THE WITNESS: Where are we going? 24 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Give me one sec. One 24 MR. ROCHMAN: Stop. Stop. Maybe moving 25 sec. 25 forward at NJM's expense at this point, Go Basie shee ee Page 47 Page 49 The time is 11:23. Back on the video ahead. record. MR. NICODEMO: Hillary, do you want to BY MR. NICODEMO: read that back, the last question to the doctor Q Doctor, can you answer the question? so he can answer it. A I'msorry. I'm going to need it (The reporter read back the referred-to repeated. I'm sorry. portion of the record.) Q Okay. Let's do it this way, then. Are MR. ROCHMAN: We have to go back on the you aware of -- and I'll rephrase it. video before you answer, Doc. Are you aware of any provision in the VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:27. 10 State Board of Chiropractor Examiners of New $10 Back on the video record. 11 Jersey's rules or regulations which specifically fia BY MR. NICODEMO;: 12 permit a licensed chiropractor in the State of ji2 Q Okay. Doctor, are you able to answer 13 New Jersey to read and interpret MRI films? f 13 that question? ue A [can't necessarily say along the lines 14 A The way I can answer this is that if the 15 of the New Jersey Board of Chiropractic. 15 New Jersey Board of Chiropractic basically sets 16 However, I do have extensive postgraduate 16 the guidelines for what chiropractors can and 17 education in MRI interpretation with 17 cannot do, I would imagine that that would also 18 certification in my ability to interpret and 18 allow them the ability to negate what our state 19 read MRIs. 19 society, the Association of New Jersey 20 Q Okay. So as we sit here today, you are 20 Chiropractors, has basically provided various 21 not able to cite to us any specific provision ai educational seminars to offer those who take the 22 under the scope of practice of chiropractors in 22 course to do an extensive amount of MRI reading 23 the state, which would specifically allow you to 23 and interpretation and get certification in 24 interpret MRI films? 24 that. 25 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. 25 Q Okay. DiPIERO COURT REPORTING (21.5) 735-8101 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg6o0f15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN 14 (Pages 50 to 53) Page 50 Page 52 A So-- (The reporter read back the referred-to Q Okay. Let's shift gears then, Doctor, portion of the record.) A Um-hum. VIDEO TECHNICIAN: Give me one sec. One Q You have given some testimony earlier sec, about doing this type of work. How frequently . Time is 11:30, Back on the video do you provide testimony in auto accident cases, record, such as you are doing here today? BY MR. NICODEMO: A Um-hum. Q Doctor, can you answer the question? MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. You know what? A Inmy -- in my experience, I can 10 Objection withdrawn. Go ahead. 10 estimate that I have testified in depositions 11 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:28. 11 and trials approximately three to four dozen 12 We are off the record, 12 times in my career. 13 (Off the video record.) 13 Q And, Doctor, when you have been called 14 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: You want to go back 14 upon to provide that testimony, is it generally 18 on. 15 on behalf of your patients? 16 MR. ROCHMAN: Hold on. Hold on. Hill, 16 A Yes. 17 read the question back then. 17 Q When you are called upon to testify, are 18 s (The reporter read back the referred-to 18 you, compensated for the time that you spend in 19 portion of the record.) 19 providing the testimony? 20 MR. ROCHMAN: All right. I'm going to 20 MR. ROCHMAN: Objection. 21 stand on my objection, Number one, it is beyond 21 MR. NICODEMO: I'm sorry. 22 the scope of direct. 22 VIDEO TECHNICIAN: The time is 11:31. 23 He wasn't asked -- he was asked whether 23 Off the video record. 24 or not he was qualified by courts, He was asked 24 (Off the video record.) 2 So whether or not he investigated and treated 25 MR. ROCHMAN: Who is the trial judge in ao a se Page 51 Page 53 people as it relates to response for injuries in Ratkowiak, Mer? Please get that for me. motor vehicle accidents. Nothing to do with This is not appropriate voir dire. It testifying. wasn't raised on Direct. And in fact, there is And number two, it does not go to his a Supreme Court case right on point that qualifications. His testimony wasn't part of -- indicates that you can't even ask this question in fact, I didn't ask him one question about his in Cross. testimony as qualifying him for an expert. You can't go to compensation anymore. So I believe that the question is You can only go to percentage. And the question inappropriate; and at this point in time, I was argumentative on top due to the fact that it 10 would move for sanctions against counsel and NJM | 10 suggested that he was -- Hill, read it back. 11 and I will continue to do that and I will put it 11 Sorry. 12 in my motion to resolve this. This is a 12 (The reporter read back the referred-to 13 frivolous voir dire. 13 portion of the record.) 14 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. I disagree. We 14 MR. ROCHMAN: It is formulated in the 15 can continue, i 15 question. All right. It is not appropriate in 16 MR. ROCHMAN: You can disagree all you | 16 voir dire. 17 want. You are not seven foot tall and dunk y17 Doe, hold on, please. May I have Judge 18 baskets in the NBA, neither one of us are. So 118 Stein's telephone number, please. Excuse me? 19 your disagreement with my assessment is #19 All right. Doc, let's take a break for 20 irrelevant. 20 asecond, I have had about all I'm going to 21 MR. NICODEMO: Well, I'm puiting that on 21 take -- not your fault, Doc, but I'm going to 22 the record so we have that. 22 try to puta stop to this. [have had all I'm 23 MR. ROCHMAN: All right. 23 going to take in this regard. 24 MR. NICODEMO: Hillary, do you want to 24 THE REPORTER: Are we slaying on the 25 read back that question? 925 record? DiPIERO COURT REPORTING (215) 735-8101 CAM-L-001129-20 09/27/2023 12:19:50 PM Pg7of15 Trans ID: LCV20232958843 HOWARD FREEDMAN iS (Pages 54 to 57) Page 54 Page 56 MR. NICODEMO: Yes. Yes. Dr. Freedman currently being examined. MR. ROCHMAN: You can leave that on the LAW CLERE: Allright. Thank you. record. I have had all that I'm going to take MR. ROCHMAN: Allright. So let's go and I'm going to try to get Judge Stein to weigh back on the record. in on it, this inappropriate voir dire. MR. NICODEMO: Before we do, I do want Dog, let's take a break for a second. to add something on the written record. Come off the video, We can't talk. You are Hillary, are you ready? under your auspices of your testimony and take THE REPORTER: I have been going through your -- put yourself on mute, please. that whole conversation. 10 THE WITNESS: Okay. Sure. 10 MR. NICODEMO: Okay. In response to 11 LAW CLERK: Judge Stein's chambers. li Mr. Rochman's objection concerning testimony 12 MR. ROCHMAN: Yes. Judge's law clerk? 12 about the doctor's fee, I will cite the model 13 David Rochman. How are you? 13 jury charge 1.13(c), the amount of the 14 LAW CLERK: Good. How are you? 14 expert's -- the expert witness's fee is a matter 15: MR. ROCHMAN: I don't know if it was 1s that you may consider as possibly affecting the 16 relayed to you what is going on. 16 believability of an expert. 17 LAW CLERK: No. She hasn't told me. 17 And [ would submit that believability 18 MR. ROCHMAN: All tight. I'm in ade, 18 and credibility and qualifications.fit under the 19 bene esse of my expert in the matter of 19 same umbrella; and for that reason, I think it 20 Ratkowiak versus Alston, Docket No. CAM-1129-20. 20 is appropriate. 21 Case is listed for pre-trial conference 21 And even if a court were to rule that it 22 with memos due next Monday and pick a jury the 22 is not, it is certainly permissible at any point 23 following Monday, which, hopefully, I think we 23 in further Cross Examination. 24 do. 24 MR. ROCHMAN: So in response, 25 Tim putting my chiropractic expert on 25 Mr. Nicodemo apparently is now going to get into Page 55 Page 57 video. I have just qualified him and my a habit that he believes his own rhetoric and he adversary has sought to Cross him on lieves his own conflation. qualifications on compensation. That rule and that jury charge is as it My perspective, it is highly relates to an expert's testimony, not an inappropriate. It is improper. And I'm trying expert's credentials or his voir dire. to put -- and it has been more contentious than ‘There is nothing in that charge that that. talks about his qualifications. And again, we And my adversary can hear and the court have rules of procedure. reporter can hear. It has been more contentious I'll take the assumption that 10 than that. 10 Mr. Nicodemo just put on the record to be such 11 T'm trying to put a stop to it. As I a1 that I -- I could do this in Cross Examination. 12 put on the record, I reached my fill of what I 12 He is right. He can Cross the doctor. 13 consider to be inappropriate. #13 He is wrong, he can do it in voir dire and he is 14 LAW CLERK: Allright. I'll relay to (14 wrong, we have a Supreme Court announcement 15 the judge. I can't give you any information or pis which I will provide the Court that he can't ask 16 any sort of recommendation.