New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division, 2025

Tyrone Nock, Etc. v. Kennedy Memorial Hospital Washington Township

Tyrone Nock, Etc. v. Kennedy Memorial Hospital Washington Township
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Decided November 26, 2025

Tyrone Nock, Etc. v. Kennedy Memorial Hospital Washington Township

Opinion

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court ." Although it is posted on the internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited . R. 1:36-3.

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY APPELLATE DIVISION DOCKET NO. A-2564-23 TYRONE NOCK, administrator of the ESTATE OF ADRIENNE NOCK, deceased, on behalf of said decedent's heirs-at-law and next-of-kin, and in his own right, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. KENNEDY MEMORIAL HOSPITAL WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP, KENNEDY UNIVERSITY HOSPITAL WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP, KENNEDY HEALTH ALLIANCE, ROWAN UNIVERSITY SCHOOL OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICINE, THOMAS WETJEN, D.O., KATHLEEN RICHTER, PA-C, NEELESH PARIKH, D.O., EMERGENCY PHYSICIAN ASSOCIATES OF SOUTH JERSEY, PC, GREGORY LICHTMAN, D.O., CORY LEBOWITZ, D.O., JAMES STENSON, D.O., SERGIO PULIDO, D.O., PHILIP WILLSIE, D.O., KELLY SCHIERS, D.O., and ANTHONY FLAIM, D.O., Defendants, and JEFFREY P. KOVACS, D.O., and RECONSTRUCTIVE ORTHOPEDICS, PA, Defendants-Appellants.

Submitted November 19, 2025 – Decided November 26, 2025 Before Judges Currier and Jablonski.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Camden County, Docket No. L-2856-18.

Lenox Law Firm, attorneys for appellants (Michael J.

Heron, Casey P. Acker, and Costadinos J. Georgiou, on the briefs).

Lite DePalma Greenberg & Afanador, LLC, and Saltz Mongeluzzi Bendesky, PC, attorneys for respondent (Jason S. Weiss, Morgan A. Kendall, and Bruce D.

Greenberg, on the brief).

PER CURIAM We have been advised this matter has been amicably adjusted, and the parties have stipulated to the dismissal of this appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.

A-2564-23

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.