Dillard v. HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT AND/OR EDS SYSTEMS
This text of 676 A.2d 1065 (Dillard v. HERTZ CLAIM MANAGEMENT AND/OR EDS SYSTEMS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of New Jersey primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
The judgment is affirmed, substantially for the reasons expressed in the opinion of the Appellate Division, reported at 277 N.J.Super. 448, 650 A.2d 1 (1994). We add that the coverage afforded under the policy is limited to the statutory coverage required by N.J.S.A 39:6A-3 and N.J.S.A 39:6B-1 in accordance with the holding in Marotta v. New Jersey Automobile Full Insurance Underwriting Association, 144 N.J. 325, 676 A.2d 1064 (1996), also decided today.
For affirmance — Chief Justice WILENTZ, and Justices HANDLER, POLLOCK, O’HERN, GARIBALDI, STEIN and COLEMAN — 7.
Opposed — None.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
676 A.2d 1065, 144 N.J. 326, 1996 N.J. LEXIS 1223, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dillard-v-hertz-claim-management-andor-eds-systems-nj-1996.