In published rulings, trial court judges in two counties have reached conflicting results on what an injured plaintiff must show to meet the verbal threshold of the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act of 1998.
The rulings differ on whether a plaintiff must show that the injury has a serious impact on his or her life, the standard enunciated by the state Supreme Court in Oswin v. Shaw, 129 N.J. 290 (1992), in interpreting a prior statute.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
