Legal Opinion
Sweeney v. Hartford Acc. & Indem. Co.
New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division
Decided October 21, 1975PublishedCited by 12 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
136 N.J. Super. 591 (1975)
347 A.2d 380
JAMES J. SWEENEY, PLAINTIFF,
v.
HARTFORD ACCIDENT & INDEMNITY COMPANY, DEFENDANT.
Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division.
Decided October 21, 1975.
Mr. Richard W. Engelbart for plaintiff (Jerome L. Yesko, attorney).
Mr. Victor C. Harwood, III, for defendant (Messrs. Gilady and Harwood, attorneys).
SMITH, J.C.C., Temporarily Assigned.
The issue in this case is whether a provision in an automobile insurance policy which reduces uninsured motorist coverage by amounts paid for workmen's compensation is valid and enforceable.
On March 20, 1970 plaintiff James J.…
2Cases cited22 opinions
- Ullman v. Wolverine InsuranceIllinois Supreme Court · 1970
- Aldcroft v. Fidelity & Casualty Co.Supreme Court of Rhode Island · 1969
- Bartlett v. Nationwide Mutual Ins.Ohio Supreme Court · 1973
- Peterson v. State Farm Mutual Automobile InsuranceOregon Supreme Court · 1964
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. CahoonSupreme Court of Alabama · 1971
17 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by12 opinions
- Rydingsword v. Liberty Mutual InsuranceSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1992
- Montedoro v. City of Asbury ParkNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1980
- National Farmers Union Property & Casualty Co. v. BangSouth Dakota Supreme Court · 1994
- Walkowitz v. Royal Globe Insurance CompanyNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
- Sproles v. GreeneCourt of Appeals of North Carolina · 1990
7 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.