Major Car Accident Verdict in the NJ State Supreme Court won by Franklin
Solomon of Weitz & Luxenberg
Christina DiProspero v. Barbara J. Penn, et
al. (A-66-03)
This is part 5 of major car collision verdict won by Franklin Solomon of Weitz & Luxenberg.
V.
Section D.
Finally, we address defendants ’ argument that the Legislature must have intended to retain the serious life impactstandard because one of AICRA ’s paramount goals was to reduce the cost of automobile insurance. The AppellateDivision in James, supra, presented that interpretative analysis, stating that “[i]f courts were to permit claims to goforward even in the absence of proof of a serious impact on a plaintiff ’s life, it would run counter to this legislativepurpose ” because “the entire thrust behind the passage of AICRA was to reduce the number of litigated claims and,thus, to bring stability to automobile insurance premiums. ” 354 N.J. Super. at 594.We disagree with that narrow assessment of the limitation on lawsuit threshold in relation to the legislative goals inAICRA. AICRA is a detailed and comprehensive statute that seeks to contain costs in multiple ways: through theprosecution of fraud, introduction of a basic insurance plan, implementation of a dispute resolution procedure, andtightening of the threshold. The new limitation on lawsuit threshold was but one means of stabilizing and reducingcosts. The Legislature could have completely eliminated the right to sue for pain and suffering, which would havepresumably reduced insurance premiums. But it did not do so. Instead, the Legislature chose to effectuate cost- cutting savings by placing specific restrictions on the right to sue. Those restrictions are set forth in the statutorylanguage of the new threshold. The Legislature did not articulate in its statutory scheme a requirement that injuredplaintiffs must prove a serious life impact to meet the threshold.
The James court ’s assessment overlooks the reality that AICRA was a product of lobbying, negotiation, and eventuallegislative compromise. The Joint Committee on Automobile Insurance Reform reviewed a number of differentpossible options for revising the verbal threshold, ranging from eliminating it entirely to enacting a threshold farstricter than the preexisting one. Deliberations with regard to automobile insurance reform: Committee Meeting ofthe Joint Committee on Automobile Insurance Reform, Leg. 208, at 79- 113 (N.J. Mar. 26, 1998) (L. 1998, c. 21),available at http://www.njleg.state.nj.us/legislativepub/Pubhear/032698dd. PDF . The Joint Committee chosefrom among the options and developed a threshold that is comparable to Florida, but unique in its own right. Thelegislation went through various permutations before it reached its present form.
Based on the thoroughness of the Committee ’s work on this subject, we cannot presume that in developing athreshold “with teeth ” the members did not consider the Oswin serious life impact standard. Nor can we concludethat the Legislature established clearly defined statutory categories of injuries to be proven by objective clinicalevidence, and then expected this Court to impose on accident victims a higher burden of proof.
It was the Legislature ’s duty to decide what degree of cost savings should be achieved through specific restrictionson the right to sue. In enacting the limitation on lawsuit threshold, it crafted a statute that defined when an accidentvictim could sue for pain and suffering damages. We should not interfere with the policy choices made by theLegislature. It may be true that there would be fewer successful claims if we were to impose a serious life impactstandard on top of the statutory requirements. However, if the Legislature intended that accident victims should havea more difficult hurdle in obtaining a recovery, then it must draft a statute that accomplishes that end. We will notwrite that statute.
see also:
Part 4
Major Car Crash Verdict in New Jersey State Supreme CourtFREE Major car crash verdict information
Part 2
Major Car Collision Verdict in New Jersey State Supreme CourtFREE Major car collision verdict information
Major Car Accident Verdict
Major Car Accident Verdict in the NJ State Supreme Court won by Franklin SolomonOur own Franklin Solomon in the NJ State Supreme Court won a major car accident verdict
