From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lilly v. Prudential Ins. Co.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Jan 18, 1991
246 N.J. Super. 280 (App. Div. 1991)

Opinion

Argued January 8, 1991 —

Decided January 18, 1991.

Before Judges MICHELS, BRODY and GRUCCIO.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Union County, whose opinion is reported at 246 N.J. Super. 357, 587 A.2d 672 (Law Div. 1990).

John T. Petras argued the cause for appellant ( Weiner Lesniak, attorneys; John T. Petras, of counsel and on the brief).

Thomas E. Hood argued the cause for respondent.


The summary judgment of the Law Division which declared that plaintiff Marilyn R. Lilly was entitled to personal injury protection benefits under a policy of insurance issued by defendant Prudential Insurance Company (more properly referred to as Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance Company) is affirmed substantially for the reasons expressed by Judge Menza in his written opinion which is reported as Lilly v. Prudential Insurance Company, 246 N.J. Super. 357 , 587 A.2d 672 (Law Div. 1990).


Summaries of

Lilly v. Prudential Ins. Co.

Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division
Jan 18, 1991
246 N.J. Super. 280 (App. Div. 1991)
Case details for

Lilly v. Prudential Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:MARILYN R. LILLY, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. PRUDENTIAL INSURANCE COMPANY…

Court:Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division

Date published: Jan 18, 1991

Citations

246 N.J. Super. 280 (App. Div. 1991)
587 A.2d 629

Citing Cases

Caballero-Gonzalez v. Adm'r for Harco Nat'l Ins. Co.

"Accordingly, in those instances where the owner's intent not to operate his uninsured motor vehicle is…

Padilla v. Pers. Serv. Ins. Co.

See Carmichael, supra, 310 N.J. Super. at 42-43; see also Caldwell v. Kline, 232 N.J. Super. 406, 412-14…