Publications
Insurance — car insurance — repairs
The plaintiff filed an action in the Law Division against the defendant, GEICO Insurance Company, alleging that it wrongfully refused to pay for property damage to his car.
Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Insurance – PIP – attorney's fees
Where the plaintiff's action seeking a declaration that it had no obligation to provide the defendant with personal injury protection benefits or to defend and indemnify her on claims arising from her operation of a car insured by it resulted
Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Insurance — PIP benefits
The plaintiff, Thamon Wright (Thamon), filed an action against the defendants Aaron Wright (Aaron) and Lisa Wright (Lisa) to recover damages for personal injuries suffered as a result of an incident in which his legs became caught beneath a truck
Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
Insurance — fraud
The Appellate Division affirms the judgment finding that the defendants violated the Insurance Fraud Prevention Act and awarded the plaintiff-insurer $175,302.88 in damages, finding that because of the close connection between the facts alleged as
Case Law Alert - 2nd Qtr 2010
There is no requirement under the Act that the specialty of a physician who performs an impairment rating evaluation be directly related to the nature of the claimant's work injury.
In this case, following her work injury, the claimant underwent an Impairment Rating Evaluation ("IRE"). The IRE physician determined that the claimant had an impairment rating of 15%.
The Supreme Court reverses the Commonwealth Court and holds that an earning power assessment performed in the area where the claimant resides is insufficient to justify a modification of benefits under §306 (b) of the Act.
In this case, the claimant sustained a work-related injury while working for the employer in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. The claimant was a West Virginia resident.
The claimant must present medical evidence to defeat a modification petition where the employer's medical expert testifies that the claimant may work 40 hours a week and up to 10 hours in any single day.
The claimant sustained a work-related injury to her low back and was awarded total disability benefits after filing a claim petition.
Third party claim seeking indemnification and contribution against design professional need not be supported by affidavit of merit until plaintiff first articulates laim implicating professional negligence on the part of third party design professional
Once again eschewing rigid application of the New Jersey Affidavit of Merit Statute, NJSA 2A:26- to 29, the New Jersey Supreme Court issued a per curiam affirmation of the Appellate Division's decision in this case.
Case Law Alert - 1st Qtr 2010
Plaintiff's motion to exclude introduction of her email exchanges involving sexual content in a sexual harassment matter denied because the emails were probative on issue of whether plaintiff was subjectively offended by alleged harasser's comments.
In Seybert, the plaintiff sought to exclude the introduction of a number of her email exchanges, which involved sexual content, pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 412.
Case Law Alert - 1st Qtr 2010
As a matter of first impression, a party may be compelled to pay an opposing party’s expert’s fees for the time the expert prepared for his deposition; however, the expert's preparation fees must be capped at the fee for the corresponding deposition.
This case arose out of a rear-end automobile collision, allegedly causing personal injuries to the plaintiff.
Case Law Alert - 1st Qtr 2010