Legal Opinion

Sikking v. Selected Risks Insurance

New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division

Decided October 18, 1985PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Opinion of the Court

OPINION

KLEINER, J.S.C.

The novel question posed in this declaratory judgment suit is whether the interpretation of legislative intent of the PIP statute, N.J.S.A. 39:6A-2(d) and 39:6A-4(b), as set forth in Gambino v. Royal Globe Ins. Co., 86 N.J. 100 (1981), is applicable to the factual issues raised at trial.

In particular, the Court must determine whether the decedent, Herman Sikking, was an “income producer,” as defined by N.J.S.A. 39:6A-2(d), at the time of his death on June 13, 1982.

Herman Sikking was employed with Owens-Illinois Kimble Division as a glassworker from October 18, 1965 until…

2Cases cited6 opinions

  1. Gambino v. Royal Globe Insurance CompaniesSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
  2. Rybeck v. RybeckNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1976
  3. Rybeck v. RybeckNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977
  4. Greenberg v. Great American Insurance Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1978
  5. Hunter v. Hartford Accident and Indemnity Co.New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1977

1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Sikking v. Selected Risks InsuranceNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1987

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API