It is jury’s responsibility to resolve issue of whether policyholder made material judgment under NJ Insurance Fraud Prevention Act.

An insurance carrier filed claims against its policyholder under common-law and statutory insurance fraud (Insurance Fraud Prevention Act) in New Jersey. The trial court granted summary judgment to the insurer on liability. The policyholder and the third-party defendant appealed, and the appellate court found that the trial court prematurely granted the insurer summary judgment on questions of materiality. It was determined that the trial court strayed from a well-established precedent in not allowing a jury to resolve them. Accordingly, on issues of whether a policyholder made a material judgment under the Insurance Fraud Prevention Act, it is the jury’s responsibility to resolve these issues, not a judge.

^{Case Law Alerts, 1st Quarter, April 2022 is prepared by Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin to provide information on recent developments of interest to our readers. This publication is not intended to provide legal advice for a specific situation or to create an attorney-client relationship. Copyright © 2022 Marshall Dennehey Warner Coleman & Goggin, all rights reserved. This article may not be reprinted without the express written permission of our firm.}