Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Commercial Door & Hardware v. Hanover Insurance Co.

February 5, 2008

COMMERCIAL DOOR & HARDWARE, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,
v.
HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, DEFENDANT-RESPONDENT, AND CONTEMPORARY ADJUSTMENTS, INC.,*FN1 DEFENDANT.



On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Cumberland County, L-0887-03.

Per curiam.

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

Argued January 15, 2008

Before Judges Skillman, Winkelstein and Yannotti.

Plaintiff, Commercial Door & Hardware, was the named insured in a policy issued by Hanover Insurance Company, insuring a building located at 16 Northwest Boulevard in Vineland, when a heavy snow caused the building's roof to collapse on February 19, 2003. After the parties were unable to agree upon the amount of plaintiff's damages, plaintiff filed suit against Hanover and its adjuster, Contemporary Adjustments.

Plaintiff appeals from an order of partial summary judgment dated July 14, 2006, in which the court dismissed plaintiff's claims for bad faith consequential damages, punitive damages, and counsel fees; and from a January 19, 2007 order barring plaintiff from introducing evidence of loss of business income at trial, and consequently granting Hanover summary judgment on plaintiff's business income loss claim.

On appeal, plaintiff raises the following legal arguments:

I. The trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for partial summary judgment entered on July 14, 2006.

A. The trial court erred by not finding defendant's conduct egregious enough to permit a grant of punitive damages.

B. The trial court erred by not finding defendant's continual delay and bad faith in this matter sufficient to grant plaintiff consequential damages.

C. The trial court erred by not allowing plaintiff to recover attorney fees.

II. The trial court erred in granting defendant's motion for summary judgment entered on January 19, 2007.

A. The trial court erred in finding a failure of evidence to sustain the business income loss claim, since any additional proof was out of time.

We have carefully considered plaintiff's arguments in light of the record and applicable law. We conclude that the arguments are ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.