Supreme Court of New Jersey Opinions
Goyco v. Progressive Insurance Company
Docket: A-12-23
Opinion Date: May 14, 2024
Judge: Solomon
Areas of Law: Insurance Law, Transportation Law
In November 2021, David Goyco was struck and injured by an automobile while operating a low-speed electric scooter (LSES). Goyco filed a claim for personal injury protection (PIP) benefits under his personal automobile policy with Progressive Insurance Company.
Progressive denied the claim, arguing that Goyco's LSES did not meet the definition of an "automobile" and that Goyco could not be considered a "pedestrian" under the New Jersey Automobile Reparation Reform Act, commonly known as the No-Fault Act.
Goyco filed a complaint, asserting that
LSES riders should be considered "pedestrians" entitled to PIP
benefits under the No-Fault Act. The trial court denied relief to Goyco, and
the Appellate Division affirmed.
The court found that Goyco's LSES was a "vehicle" that used a rechargeable electric motor and was therefore "propelled by other than muscular power" and was "designed for use on highways, rails and tracks."
The court also rejected Goyco's reliance on a 2019 statute that provides that an LSES should be considered equivalent to a bicycle, stating that the statute was not intended to have any effect on the No-Fault Act.
The court concluded that Goyco was not a pedestrian entitled to PIP benefits under Progressive's No-Fault insurance policy.
5 comments:
If 'Goyco' had 'Geico' then all would be good!
Actually, if 'Goyco' had 'Geico' then all the state would be in good hands!
What if he had a gomco
"What if he had a gomco"
Kol hakuved!
You mean a gomco
Bris ???
Post a Comment