Esdaile v. Angle
Supreme Court of New Jersey
1Per curiam
We reverse the judgment of the Appellate Division substantially for the reasons set forth in Judge D’Annunzio’s dissent. See Esdaile v. Hartsfield, 245 N.J.Super. 591, 600-02, 586 A.2d 334 (1991). In doing so we imply no position on whether a recipient of payments in the nature of personal injury protection (PIP) benefits from the Unsatisfied Claim and Judgment Fund (Fund) may maintain a cause of action for those same special damages against a third-party tortfeasor. Nor do we resolve the issue of whether the Fund may seek reimbursement from a third-party tortfeasor for payments in the nature…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Aetna Ins. Co. v. Gilchrist Brothers, Inc.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
- Wilson v. Unsatisfied Claim and Judgment Fund Bd.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1988
- Buoni v. Browning Ferres IndustriesNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987
- Esdaile v. HartsfieldNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1991
3Cited by6 opinions
- Unsatisfied Claim & Judgment Fund Board v. New Jersey Manufacturers InsuranceSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
- UCJF v. NJ Mfrs. Ins. Co.Supreme Court of New Jersey · 1994
- Allianz Insurance v. GarrettDistrict Court, E.D. Virginia · 1994
- Auguste v. SearsNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1999
- FRANK DEGENNARO VS. PHILO CHAPMAN L-0250-17, GLOUCESTER COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 2019
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.