|
IMPORTANT TRENDS IN NEW JERSEY COVERAGE LAW
George J. Kenny
INTRODUCTION
. The role of the Court.
. General rules of insurance policy construction – See Chapter 1 of New Jersey Insurance Law, Second Edition (2000)
LANDMARK CASES IN COVERAGE DEVELOPMENT
1. The doctrine of reasonable expectations: the court's ultimate criterion:
Kievit v. Loyal Protective Life Ins. Co., 34 N.J. 475 (1961);
Meyer v. New Jersey Life Ins. Co., 101 N.J. 597 (1986);
2. Measuring the duty to defend: the four corners test:
Danek v. Hommer, 28 N.J. Super. 68 (App. Div. 1953), affirmed o.b., 15
N.J. 573 (1954)
3. Walking away from a defense: the New Jersey Rule:
Burd v. Sussex Mut. Ins. Co., 56 N.J. 383 (1970);
Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Aetna Life & Cas. Ins. Co., 98 N.J. 18 (1984);
4. Subjective vs. objective intent to injure:
Voorhees v. Preferred Mut. Ins. Co., 128 N.J. 165 (1992);
SL Industries v. American Motorists Ins. Co., 128 N.J. 188 (1992);
5. Extra-contractual damages:
Rova Farms v. Investors Ins. Co. of Am., 65 N.J. 474 (1974) – third party coverage;
Pickett v. Lloyds, 131 N.J. 457 (1993) – first party coverage.
6. Employer coverage:
employment discrimination – Schmidt v. Smith, 155 N.J. 44 (1998)
employer liability – Mabee v. Borden, 316 N.J. Super 218 (App. Div. 1998);
New Jersey Mfrs. Ins. Co. v. Joseph Oat Corp., 287 N.J. Super. 190 (App. Div. 1995).
7. Construction defect issues:
Weedo v. Stone-E-Brick, Inc., 81 N.J. 233 (1979);
Grand Cove II Condominium Ass'n. v. Ginsberg, 219 N.J. Super. 58 (App. Div. 1996).
8. Misrepresentation by the Insured:
In the application – Merchants Indem. Corp. of N.Y. v. Eggleston, 37 N.J. 114 (1962); Massachusetts Mut. Life Ins. Co. v. Manzo, 122 N.J. 104 (1991);
In the claims process – Longobardi v. Chubb Insurance Co., 121 N.J.
530 (1990)
9. Developing issues:
Counsel Fee Shifting
Arbitrator Jurisdiction
Punitive Damage Claims in Settlement Negotiations
Extrinsic Facts Affecting AFF Coverage
|
