Search Rutgers Law Library N.J. Court Opinions

46 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/appellate/a4255-16.opn.html -- rank: 497

... dismissing his claim for personal injury protection (PIP) benefits under N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4 (the 'Deemer' statute). We affirm because plaintiff's injuries were ... under the policy is used or operated in this State . . . . [N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4.] Accordingly, the Deemer statute provides that 'out-of-state policies ... an out- of-state automobile policy is not deemed by N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4 to provide PIP benefits when the named insured is injured ...

docket:
court:	NJ Superior Court Law/Chancery Division
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	9249

47 NOWELL JAMES v. NEW JERSEY MANUFACTURERS INSURANCE COMPANY -- rank: 497

... 1993) (where we characterized the effect of the "deemer" statute, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, to be the "automatic reformation of out-of-state policies ...

docket:	a2108-10
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2012-07-05
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	16068

48 HARRY GRANT V. CLAUDE N. THOMAS, ET AL. -- rank: 486

... final summary judgment declaring that the New Jersey "deemer" statute, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, imposes Personal Injury Protection liability limits up to $250,000 ... under the policy is used or operated in this State.         [ N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4].     There are two issues in this case. The first is ...

docket:	a0713-97
court:	njappellate
decided:	1997-12-31
status:	published
citation:	<a href=
Document Size:	18146

49 KAREN METAKES PARISI VS AETNA CAS. & SURETY CO. -- rank: 467

... disclaiming coverage on the ground of the statute of limitations, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4. This action was commenced in April 1994.     Defendant moved for ...

docket:	a5988-95
court:	njappellate
decided:	1997-01-06
status:	published
citation:	296 N.J.Super. 179
Document Size:	17526

50 GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES INSURANCE COMPANY v. COMMUNITY OPTIONS INC -- rank: 449

... injury protection coverage required to be provided in accordance with [ N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4], or although required did not maintain personal injury protection or ...

docket:	a5904-09
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2011-06-29
status:	published
citation:	420 N.J. Super. 546 22 A.3d 91
Document Size:	18085

51 ALISON MOSES v. ROBERT J. MANALO -- rank: 433

... the lawsuit limitation threshold through application of the Deemer Statute, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, and N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8(a). At ... under the policy is used or operated in this State." N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4. Since plaintiff's insurance provider provided insurance coverage in New ...

docket:	a4569-14
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2017-03-07
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	12172

52 LOUIS SCOTT & LAURA WHITAKER VS RONALD A. DEVILLA, ET., AL -- rank: 409

... the language employed by the Legislature in the Deemer provision, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, was inadvertently overbroad and was not intended to restrict the ...

docket:	a3534-94
court:	njappellate
decided:	1996-02-15
status:	published
citation:	287 N.J.Super. 370
Document Size:	7294

53 JASPER T. LYMON v. CAPE TRANSIT CORPORATION, et al. -- rank: 401

... the tractor trailer. Defendants resisted, arguing that the deemer statute, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, made no provision for PIP benefits for bus passengers. We ...

docket:	a5773-99
court:	njappellate
decided:	2001-05-11
status:	published
citation:	340 N.J. Super. 573
Document Size:	9166

54 JOHN HUGHES & JOYCE HUGHES v. RICHARD K. DILLON -- rank: 393

... a rear-end automobile collision, we examine the applicability of N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, commonly called the "Deemer Statute," to the facts of this ... application and argued plaintiff was subject to the provisions of N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, which requires an insurer authorized to transact business in New ... of the Automobile Insurance Cost Reduction Act of 1998 (AICRA), N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4 obligate insurers that are authorized to transact insurance business in ...

docket:	A3730-06
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2008-02-25
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	24948

55 DONNA HAND v. PHILADELPHIA INSURANCE COMPANY -- rank: 374

... 1993) (where we characterized the effect of the "deemer" statute, N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4, to be the "automatic reformation of out-of-state policies ...

docket:	a1957-07
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-07-01
status:	published
citation:	408 N.J. Super. 124 973 A.2d 973
Document Size:	86132

56 EDWARD ZABILOWICZ v. ROSLYNE KELSEY -- rank: 350

... these standards, we conclude that summary judgment was properly granted. N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4 requires an out-of-state insurer authorized to do business ...

docket:	a3850-07
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-01-14
status:	unpublished
citation:	198 N.J. 474 968 A.2d 1190
Document Size:	21978

57 RUTGERS CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANDREW MCADAMS -- rank: 347

... written out of state that do not provide such coverage. N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4. Hence, Pennsylvania statutory law does not require insurers writing policies ...

docket:	A0101-06
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2007-05-01
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	43851

58 MICHELLE LAYTON v. SAMI I. ALKHATIB -- rank: 334

... appeal, in addition to her estoppel argument, plaintiff claims that N.J.S.A. 17:28-1.4 (the Deemer statute), precludes Allstate from setting off PIP benefits ...

docket:	a3992-07
court:	NJ Superior Court Appellate Division
decided:	2009-04-27
status:	unpublished
citation:
Document Size:	50761

59 /usr/local/share/www/libweb/collections/courts/appellate/a0519-18.opn.html -- rank: 229

... based on that court's view that the 'deemer statute,' N.J.S.A. 17:28- 1.4, did not require GEICO to provide New Jersey's compulsory ...

docket:
court:
decided:
status:
citation:
Document Size:	4109