# New Jersey Affidavit of Merit Record Review > Page-cited record review for New Jersey affidavits of merit under N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 — the file read in full inside the 60-day window after the answer. Canonical page: https://medrecords.ai/solutions/new-jersey-certificate-of-merit/ --- NewWe now read the actual MRI and CT imaging — not just the radiologist's 1-page report. [See how →](https://medrecords.ai/product/imaging/) [Home](https://medrecords.ai/) ›[Solutions](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/) › — New Jersey Affidavit of Merit NEW JERSEY CERTIFICATE OF MERIT RECORD REVIEW ## 60 days from the answer, and the specialty has to match. New Jersey certificate of merit record review services prepare the page-cited record a licensed professional reads before executing the affidavit N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 requires. Every encounter and finding is indexed to its source page, so the reasonable-probability statement in the affidavit rests on a file that has actually been read. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=new-jersey-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) Click any row → the source page it cites Record review · Case #IME-4812 documented Adams, Timothy · post-answer record set 342 pp / 2 packets received logged 11 duplicate pages removed free p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Pages 342 Documents 27 Cited 100% ### The affidavit is a threshold. Missing it is usually fatal. We do not build for a case type until we can name the standard that defines a correct output and the person who grades the file against it. In merit screening, both are written into the rule itself. The standard and the referee The rulebook - N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27, which requires an affidavit of an appropriate licensed person within sixty days of the answer, stating a reasonable probability that the care fell outside acceptable professional standards - N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27, under which the court may grant one additional period not to exceed sixty days upon a finding of good cause - N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41, the Patients First Act specialty-matching requirement for an affiant testifying against a specialist - N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-29, which makes failure to provide the affidavit a failure to state a cause of action The referee - The trial court, where the statutory consequence of no affidavit is dismissal, ordinarily with prejudice - The Ferreira conference practice, at which compliance is taken up early rather than at the end of discovery - The affiant, who for a specialist defendant has to be board certified in the same specialty or subspecialty by the ABMS or the AOA Licensed-person review hours inside a sixty-day window that starts at the answer Flat 10¢/page here, duplicates free Record review · Case #IME-4812 cited 100% Packet — 342 pp / 2 packets · 11 deduplicated — logged Encounter chronology — Built from the produced record — cited Treating specialties — Which specialist did what, and when — cited Records referenced, not produced — Named in the chart, absent from the file — flagged Review delivered · cited 100% · no professional-standards opinion offered How it works ### 3 steps between the records and the affidavit. 01 #### Send the record set Hospital charts, office notes, imaging and operative reports, nursing records and billing, in any format. 02 #### We return the review, page-cited The encounter chronology, treating specialties, findings and course of treatment, each line citing the page it came from, with referenced-but-absent records flagged. 03 #### Your licensed person executes the affidavit Whether there is a reasonable probability that the care fell outside acceptable professional standards is the affiant's statement, and filing is counsel's. The boundary, in writing ### A record review, never an affidavit of merit. We index and cite what the record documents. We do not assess acceptable professional standards, state that there is a reasonable probability they were departed from, or execute an affidavit under N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27. That statement belongs to an appropriate licensed person. Because the affiant's specialty has to match the defendant's under the Patients First Act, the review identifies which specialty delivered each encounter and cites it. Knowing who has to sign is half the sixty-day problem. Audit trail · Case #IME-4812 exportable 08:12 — Packet received · 342 pp / 2 packets — system 08:31 — 11 pages deduplicated — system 08:44 — p.140 flagged — wrong patient — system 08:54 — Record review complete · review complete · chronology cited · cited 100% — system 09:20 — Record review reviewed · citations verified — reviewer 09:26 — Record review exported · affidavit executed and served off-platform — reviewer Every access logged · file deleted 30 days after delivery Why Medrecords AI ### The rules the platform never breaks. EVERY LINE CITED CASE #IME-4812 · ADAMS, T. 342 pp 2/14 — ER visit, right knee p.4 4/18 — arthroscopic surgery p.61 p.140 — wrong patient quarantined Medrecords AI Read every page · cite every line #### HIPAA, under a signed BAA Every file is handled under our Business Associate Agreement, from the first byte. #### Never trains a model Your records are never used to train any AI model — ours or anyone else's. #### Every line cited If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every sentence links to its source page. #### Deleted after delivery Files are deleted 30 days after delivery, with a full audit log of every access. Powered by the platform ### 4 capabilities behind every record review. The record review is one deliverable of the same platform that reads, sorts, and cites the whole record. [ #### Medical Records OCR Every page read in full — hospital charts, office notes, nursing flowsheets, handwritten records — nothing skipped, nothing guessed. IN ACTION · 342 pp / 2 packets → 27 documents, read in full ](https://medrecords.ai/product/ocr/) [ #### Medical Chronology The course of care builds itself into one timeline, with the treating specialty named at each encounter. IN ACTION · first presentation → injury → current treatment, one continuous timeline ](https://medrecords.ai/product/chronology/) [ #### Verifiable AI Citations If we can't cite it, we don't say it. Every line of the review links to the page range behind it. IN ACTION · review → cited 100% ](https://medrecords.ai/product/citations/) [ #### Medical Summary Reports The review formats straight into the affiant's working file — your template, your letterhead. IN ACTION · record review → affidavit-ready ](https://medrecords.ai/product/summaries/) FAQ ### New Jersey affidavits of merit, answered. No. N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-27 requires an affidavit of an appropriate licensed person stating a reasonable probability that the care fell outside acceptable professional standards. That is theirs to state and sign. We prepare the page-cited record review they read first. From the defendant's answer, not from filing. The statute allows the court to grant one additional period not to exceed sixty days upon a finding of good cause, and New Jersey's Ferreira conference practice raises compliance early rather than late. Under the Patients First Act at N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-41, an affiant testifying against a specialist generally has to be board certified in the same specialty or subspecialty. Identifying which specialty delivered which encounter is part of working out who can sign. No. Medrecords AI does not retrieve records from providers or facilities. You bring the records you already have — review starts in minutes from upload. Retrieval vendors take days; you can keep yours and still cut the review to minutes. N.J.S.A. 2A:53A-29 treats the failure to provide the affidavit as a failure to state a cause of action, and dismissal is ordinarily with prejudice. That is why the reading window matters more here than the pleading. ### Send one file. We'll tell you what we can read. No obligation. If the case type is buildable we'll scope it; if it isn't, we'll say so. [Test a file ](https://medrecords.ai/test-a-file/?src=new-jersey-certificate-of-merit) [Book a demo](https://medrecords.ai/demo/) [See every case type we process →](https://medrecords.ai/solutions/case-types/)