X

Thank you for sharing!

Your article was successfully shared with the contacts you provided.
VOL. 2, NO. 157 DECISIONS RELEASED SEPTEMBER 8, 1994 INSURANCE – AUTOMOBILES 23-3-3975 William Dickenson v. Indemnity Ins. Co. of N. Am., et al. v. License Beverage Ins. Exch., Law Div. (15 pp.) Plaintiff injured when a drunken driver drove car into his house could pursue his claim for underinsured motorist benefits even though the driver had liability limits greater than plaintiff’s UIM limits, since the driver’s insurer disclaimed coverage due to her failure to cooperate in the investigation. [Approved for publication Sept. 2, 1994.] INSURANCE – CIVIL PROCEDURE 23-3-3976 Melanie Mizrahi v. Allstate Ins. Co. and Scottsdale Ins. Co., Law Div. (10 pp.) Trial court held that the employee of reinsurer could not be offered as an expert on insurance matters, since he was not licensed as an “insurance consultant” under the New Jersey Insurance Producer Licensing Act, N.J.S.A. 17:22A-1 to -25. [Approved for publication Sept. 2, 1994.] TORTS 36-2-3977 Linda Mandel v. Alfred Aguilar, et al., App. Div. (4 pp.) Where defendants fraudulently denied that they owned a dog that bit plaintiff, complaint was not time-barred, since (1) discovery rule barred defendant’s assertion of two-year statute of limitations for negligence and (2) separate counts of complaint, alleging damages for fraudulent denial and fraudulent misrepresentation did not accrue until plaintiff confirmed ownership. TORTS – JURISDICTION 36-3-3978 Farouk El-Menshawy, et al. v. Egypt Air and ESMA Travel Co., Inc., Law Div. (9 pp.) Where plaintiff travelers sued defendants for not honoring their confirmed flight reservations, trial court held that (1) the claim against the airline is preempted by the Airline Deregulation Act of 1978, since it related to airline services, and (2) the travel agent’s unsupported summary judgment motion is denied, since there was no factual basis upon which it could be determined whether it was a “ticket agent” or “air carrier” as defined by the Federal Aviation Commission. [Approved for publication Sept. 2, 1994.] CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE 14-2-3979 State v. Patrick Joseph Carroll, App. Div. (4 pp.) Trial court erred in accepting defendant’s retraxit guilty plea to fourth-degree retaliation against a witness, for which there was an insufficient factual basis. 14-2-3980 State v. Darryl Hayes, App. Div. (4 pp.) Where county sheriff’s officer refused to allow incarcerated defendant to go to court until he agreed to have his picture taken, and as a result defendant was not present during part of his trial for a disorderly persons offense, conviction is reversed since defendant did not knowingly and voluntarily waive his right to be present at trial.

Want to continue reading?
Become a Free ALM Digital Reader.

Benefits of a Digital Membership:

  • Free access to 3 articles* every 30 days
  • Access to the entire ALM network of websites
  • Unlimited access to the ALM suite of newsletters
  • Build custom alerts on any search topic of your choosing
  • Search by a wide range of topics

*May exclude premium content
Already have an account?

 
 

ALM Legal Publication Newsletters

Sign Up Today and Never Miss Another Story.

As part of your digital membership, you can sign up for an unlimited number of a wide range of complimentary newsletters. Visit your My Account page to make your selections. Get the timely legal news and critical analysis you cannot afford to miss. Tailored just for you. In your inbox. Every day.

Copyright © 2020 ALM Media Properties, LLC. All Rights Reserved.