Skip Navigation LinksReported-Cases

​Reported Cases

Canino, James v. New York News, Inc., 96 N.J. 189 (1984) - This case established the right of the estate of a deceased plaintiff to sue for libel and slander. Tony represented the plaintiff in that case against the New York News and the decision received a write up in the New York Times newspaper.

A.J. Tenwood Associates v. Orange Senior Citizens Housing, Co., 200 N.J. Super. 515 (App. Div. 1985) - This case established the validity of a contractual limitation period of one year in which to file suit in a construction contract and the standard for an award of pre-judgment interest.

Hull, Michael v. Getty Refining & Marketing Co., 202 N.J. Super. 461 (App. Div. 1985) - In this decision, the Appellate Division reversed the Trial Court's entry of judgment notwithstanding the verdict against Tony's client Bernardi Brothers, Inc. The case was remanded to the Law Division for reinstatement of the verdict of no cause of action.

Foley Machinery Co. v. Amland Contractors v. Camden Fire Insurance Assoc., 209 N.J. Super. 70 (App. Div. 1986) - This case established the right of an insurance carrier to subrogate against a tort feasor even though it denies coverage. In that case, the insured received a verdict against the carrier for coverage for the theft of a certain track loader. However, judgment was entered in favor of the carrier against the purchaser of the stolen equipment for the full amount of the claim.

Ideal Mutual Insurance Co. v. Royal Globe Insurance Co., 211 N.J. Super. 336 (App. Div. 1986) - This case established the right of a carrier paying personal injury protection benefits to subrogate and demand contribution from a carrier providing insurance coverage to a family member residing in the same household.

Killeen Trucking, Inc. v. Great American Surplus Lines Insurance Co., 211 N.J. Super. 712 (App. Div. 1986) - This case established the principle that a container once coupled to a chassis which is then connected to a tractor becomes a trailer within the meaning of a collision policy covering a loss to a trailer caused by a collision.

Berger, James v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. Fitchburg Mutual Insurance Co., Docket Number 86-5863, Third Circuit Court of Appeals, 1987 - In this case, the Court upheld the motor vehicle exclusion as contained in a homeowner's policy as against allegations of negligent entrustment and negligent repair of a motor vehicle.

Echevarias, Ramon v. Lopez v. Preferred Mutual Insurance Co., 240 N.J. Super. 104 (App. Div. 1990) - In this case, the Court established the right of an insurance carrier to seek contribution and indemnity against an agent, and to collect from the agent for loss it was deemed to cover due to the error or omission of the agent.

Sinopoli, Rocco v. The North River Insurance Co., 244 N.J. Super. 245 (App. Div. 1990) - In this case, the Court upheld the business exclusion in the homeowner's policy issued to the owner of a shoe store. A child was severally burned when acid kept in the back room at the shoe store to unclog a drain was grabbed by a child who sustained scarring as a result.

Hofing, Sidney v. CNA Insurance Co., 247 N.J. Super. 82 (App. Div. 1991) - In this case, the Court found that there would be no coverage under an attorney's malpractice policy for a suit by a client seeking to establish that the law firm's fees were not reasonable and that the client was entitled to the difference between the value of the services and the amount paid.

Voorhees, Eileen v. Preferred Mutual Insurance Co., 128 N.J. 168 (1992) - The Supreme Court in Voorhees found that an emotional injury which resulted in physical manifestations would be covered as a bodily injury under a homeowner's policy. However, the Supreme Court acknowledged that with respect to intentional and unintentional acts that an allocation of defense and indemnity payments must be made between covered and uncovered claims.

Pickett, Burton v. Lloyd's, 131 N.J. 457 (1993) - The Supreme Court permitted an insured to recover consequential damages due to a wrongful delay or denial of payment of benefits under an insurance policy in the form of lost income only upon a showing of "no fairly debatable reason" for the delay or denial of benefits. The Court specifically disallowed any claim for punitive damages or counsel fees for what it determined to be bad faith conduct in that particular case.

Braun, George v. The Township of Mantua, 207 N.J. Super. 404 (Law Div. 1993) - This case involved the wash out of a roadway which also served as a dam and the respective duties of the property owner and the Township in maintaining the roadway. The court held that the Township had the duty to maintain the dam while the property owner had a duty to inspect.

Nunn, Alan v. Franklin Mutual Insurance Co., 274 N.J. Super. 543 (App. Div. 1994) - In this case, the Appellate Division in the first Appellate level case dealing with the absolute pollution exclusion in the State of New Jersey upheld the exclusion as it applied to a mixed use commercial and residential structure wherein the insured resided by also maintained a rural post office.
Search EDP v. Franklin Mutual Insurance Co., 267 N.J. Super. (App. Div. 1993) - Search EDP was an employment agency that placed an employee with a client. The employee later stabbed a co-employee and had a history of conflicts while at other employers. The Court upheld the exclusion contained in the business owner's policy for the rendering or failure to render professional services and dismissed the case against Tony's client but held that the professional liability carrier, American Home had to provide coverage despite an exclusion for bodily injury claims.

Brookside Apartments, Inc. v. C.S., 276 N.J. Super. 501 (App. Div. 1994) - in this case, the Appellate Division reversed the Trial Court which had dismissed the subrogation claim of the plaintiff with prejudice due to what the Trial Court had determined to be the illegal procurement of juvenile criminal records by the attorney for the subrogating carrier. The Trial Court was reversed and the case remanded which resulted in a substantial recovery by the subrogating carrier.

Charles Bloom & Company v. Echo Jewelers , 279 N.J. Super. 372 (App. Div. 1995) - in this case, the Court dealt with the novel issue of "conversion" in the diamond industry wherein diamonds are left by the wholesale jeweler with the retailer on "memorandum"and whether or not the failure to return the diamonds resulted in personal liability of the owners of the retail jewelry store. Tony represented the plaintiff and the Appellate Division held that personal liability would attach to the owners of the jewelry store even though they operated as a corporation since the memorandum created personal liability.

Brett, Patrick v. Great American Recreation, Inc., 279 N.J. Super. 306 (App. Div. 1995) - in this case, the Appellate Division, which was later affirmed by the Supreme Court, sustained the Summary Judgment entered in favor of a condominium unit owner who had permitted a relative to use the condominium located on a ski slope and supplied a toboggan which was later utilized by his guests while drunk, resulting in severe bodily injury to several people using the toboggan.

Kentopp, Eugene v. Franklin Mutual Insurance Co., 293 N.J. Super. 66 (App. Div. 1996) - Kentopp was one of a group of 12 decisions selected by the Appellate Division to review the  owned property exclusion commonly found in the CGL policy with regard to groundwater contamination. While the Trial Court held in favor of Franklin finding that groundwater was "owned property", the Appellate Division, with respect to each of the 12 matters before it, held that groundwater, due to its fluid nature, and based upon the interest of the State, was not owned property.

Tradesoft Technologies v. Franklin Mutual Insurance Co., 329 N.J. Super. 137 (App. Div. 2000) - A landmark decision regarding advertising injury coverage for high-tech intellectual property. The Court found no coverage for "offer to sell patent infringement", and held that the prior publication exclusion applied to all categories of advertising injury offenses.

Winding Hills Condominium Assoc. Inc. v. American Reliance Insurance Co., 332 N.J. Super. 85 (App. Div. 2000) - In this case, involving structural damages as a result of continuous settlement of condominium structures, the court applied the "manifestation rule", instead of the "continuous trigger" in a first party claim for property damages.

Balliet v. Fennel, 368 N.J. Super. 15 (App. Div. 2004) - The Appellate Court upheld the Law Division decision applying a two year statute of limitations on a claim for breach of fiduciary duty made against a clergy person by a parishioner, arising from marital counseling provided by a pastor where it was alleged that the pastor was having an affair with the spouse of the parishioner.

Scully v. Fitzgerald, 176 N.J. 429.(2004) - In this case, the Supreme court clarified the standard of proof required to establish the liability of a landlord to a tenant for damages from a fire caused by an unknown third party.

Penn National v. Costa 198 N.J. 229 -Dispute between homeowner's carrier and auto carrier with respect to accident. The Supreme Court clarified the required nexus to establish coverage under the auto policy. There must be a connection between the negligent act, not the injury, and the ownership, maintenance or use of the motor vehicle for coverage under the auto policy, and to apply the auto exclusion under the homeowners policy.