In Britten v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., No. A-2440-05T3, 2007 WL 77348 (N.J. Super. A.D. Jan. 12, 2007), a New Jersey court ruled that the plaintiff did not qualify as a primary insured under her mother's policy.

 

Plaintiff Kimberly Britten was involved in a motor vehicle accident in which she sustained injuries. Her medical bills exceeded the $75,000 of PIP benefits on her own auto policy, so she sought to collect under her mother's policy, which carried $250,000 in PIP benefits. At the time of the accident, she resided with her mother, Jane Britten.

 

Jane Britten's auto insurer, Liberty Mutual, denied the claim.

 

Kimberly Britten argued that she was not “precluded from recovering PIP benefits as a resident insured under her mother's policy by virtue of her own personal auto insurance policy. Rather, she is only precluded from a double recovery, which plaintiff maintains results from recovery under her mother's policy, without crediting the $75,000 in PIP benefits to which she is entitled under her own insurance policy.”

 

While the court agreed that a fair reading of relevant case law supports Britten's argument, it also stated that New Jersey law enacted subsequent to the court decisions negates it. The court said, “Because of plaintiff's status as a resident member of Janet Britten's household, however, this interpretation falls short in light of the clear language contained in” the law.

 

The law provides the following: “An insurer may also exclude from the benefits provided…any person having incurred injuries or death, who at the time of the accident…was a member of the named insured's family residing in the named insured's household, if that person is entitled to coverage…as a named insured under the terms of another policy.”

 

The court found that the plain language of the law established that Kimberly Britten did not qualify as a primary insured under her mother's policy. The law also allowed Liberty Mutual to deny PIP benefits for Kimberly Britten.