Law.com Subscribers SAVE 30%
Call 855-808-4530 or email [email protected] to receive your discount on a new subscription.
Innocent Spouse Can Be Denied Coverage, Says NJ
Can an insured's resident spouse be precluded from receiving no-fault coverage if the insured has commited fraud? On January 29, 2003, the New Jersey Supreme Court decided the case of Palisades Safety & Insurance Association v. Leonel Bastien and Paule Bastien, 814 A.2d 619 (2003) and decided for the first time 'whether an insured's resident spouse is precluded from receiving no-fault coverage when the insured lies to the insurer about his marital status and represents that there were no other persons of driving age residing in his household.' Id. at 620. The court affirmed a prior decision by the Appellate Division of the New Jersey Superior Court.
In this case, Leonel Bastien applied to obtain an automobile liability insurance policy from Palisades Safety & Insurance Association. In his application, Leonel falsely represented that he was single and that he was the sole driver of the two vehicles for which he sought coverage. Based upon the information provided in the policy application, Palisades issued a policy of automobile insurance with an annual premium of $2201.00. Over the following 8 months, Bastien submitted documents to Palisades in which he again represented that he was the sole licensed driver in his household, and that there were no other residents who were over the age of 16. In July of 1997, he added a third automobile to his policy and, in doing so, repeated his prior misrepresentations.
On October 3, 1997, Bastien's wife, Paule, was involved in an automobile accident while driving the Mazda that was added to the carrier's policy in July of 1997. Mrs. Bastien's mother, Mary LaRoche, was a passenger in the vehicle at the time of the accident. Both Paule Bastien and Mary LaRoche filed a claim for no-fault benefits under the Palisades policy.
Major Differences In UK, U.S. Copyright Laws
This article highlights how copyright law in the United Kingdom differs from U.S. copyright law, and points out differences that may be crucial to entertainment and media businesses familiar with U.S law that are interested in operating in the United Kingdom or under UK law. The article also briefly addresses contrasts in UK and U.S. trademark law.
The Article 8 Opt In
The Article 8 opt-in election adds an additional layer of complexity to the already labyrinthine rules governing perfection of security interests under the UCC. A lender that is unaware of the nuances created by the opt in (may find its security interest vulnerable to being primed by another party that has taken steps to perfect in a superior manner under the circumstances.
Strategy vs. Tactics: Two Sides of a Difficult Coin
With each successive large-scale cyber attack, it is slowly becoming clear that ransomware attacks are targeting the critical infrastructure of the most powerful country on the planet. Understanding the strategy, and tactics of our opponents, as well as the strategy and the tactics we implement as a response are vital to victory.
Removing Restrictive Covenants In New York
In Rockwell v. Despart, the New York Supreme Court, Third Department, recently revisited a recurring question: When may a landowner seek judicial removal of a covenant restricting use of her land?
Legal Possession: What Does It Mean?
Possession of real property is a matter of physical fact. Having the right or legal entitlement to possession is not "possession," possession is "the fact of having or holding property in one's power." That power means having physical dominion and control over the property.