B. Fortino

In the context of a family law trial, the court held a voir dire to determine the admissibility of expert opinion evidence from a pediatrician regarding alleged child maltreatment.

The applicant father sought to exclude the evidence entirely, arguing the expert was a litigation expert who failed to comply with procedural rules and lacked impartiality.

The court found the pediatrician was a participant and non-party expert, and admitted his viva voce evidence and most of his report, but excluded specific paragraphs opining on whether the child suffered maltreatment specifically in the father's care, finding those conclusions lacked necessity and threshold reliability.

The parties signed Minutes of Settlement regarding parenting, which were incorporated into a final order.

Shortly after, the father brought a motion alleging the mother unilaterally decided to home-school their child without consultation, contrary to the order.

The mother argued she had final decision-making authority and had consulted prior to the order.

The court found the parties were not ad idem when signing the Minutes and that the mother's interpretation of the consultation requirement was flawed.

The court exercised its discretion to rescind the unentered final order, reinstating a previous temporary order requiring online schooling, and directed the mother to immediately enroll the child in school.