Breen v. New Jersey Manufacturers Indemnity Insurance

New Jersey Superior Court App Division

Breen v. New Jersey Manufacturers Indemnity Insurance

263 A.2d 802, 109 N.J. Super. 473, 1970 N.J. Super. LEXIS 575

CourtNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

DecidedApril 6, 1970

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 263 A.2d 802 (Breen v. New Jersey Manufacturers Indemnity Insurance) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Breen v. New Jersey Manufacturers Indemnity Insurance, 263 A.2d 802, 109 N.J. Super. 473, 1970 N.J. Super. LEXIS 575 (N.J. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed essentially for the reasons set forth in Judge Malech’s opinion.

We find no merit in plaintiffs suggestion that the policy issued by defendant to its insured, Milton Stern, against whom plaintiff has recovered a judgment in an automobile negligence action, may not have contained the same terms as the sample policy submitted by defendant to the trial court. The proofs in the trial court established without contradiction that the relevant provisions (see 105 N. J. Super., at 307) of the Stern policy and the sample policy were the same. That fact was further corroborated by the supplemental affidavit filed by defendant, at our request, setting forth that such provisions were embodied in every automobile liability insurance policy issued by it at the time the Stern policy was written.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Per Curiam.

The judgment is affirmed essentially for the reasons set forth in Judge Malech’s opinion.

We find no merit in plaintiffs suggestion that the policy issued by defendant to its insured, Milton Stern, against whom plaintiff has recovered a judgment in an automobile negligence action, may not have contained the same terms as the sample policy submitted by defendant to the trial court. The proofs in the trial court established without contradiction that the relevant provisions (see 105 N. J. Super., at 307) of the Stern policy and the sample policy were the same. That fact was further corroborated by the supplemental affidavit filed by defendant, at our request, setting forth that such provisions were embodied in every automobile liability insurance policy issued by it at the time the Stern policy was written.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

263 A.2d 802, 109 N.J. Super. 473, 1970 N.J. Super. LEXIS 575, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/breen-v-new-jersey-manufacturers-indemnity-insurance-njsuperctappdiv-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack