">
NJ - Punitive Damages Archives - Fineman, Krekstein, & Harris
BLOG
Main Menu
Home
Firm Overview
Commitment to Diversity
Community Involvement
Publications
Seminars
Attorneys
Lee Applebaum
Phinorice J. Boldin
Andrew A. Chirls
Stanley B. Edelstein
S. David Fineman
Barry A. Furman
Jay Barry Harris
(1955 - 2016)
Michael H. Krekstein
Gary A. Krimstock
Scott H. Mustin
Mary F. Platt
Lowell F. Raeder
Rachel Rempel
Deirdre M. Richards
James A. Rosenstein
(Retired)
Diane B. Sher
David R. White
Practice Groups
Administrative Law
Employment Law
Alternative Dispute Resolution
Government Liability
Appellate Litigation
Government Relations and Advocacy
Business and Estate Planning
Insurance Defense Litigation
Commercial Litigation
Insurance Coverage and Bad Faith
Community Association Law
Mergers and Acquisitions
Construction Litigation
Real Estate
Corporate Finance
Tax Assessment Appeals
Creditors Rights, Financial Services and Workouts
Tax Controversies
News
Blogs
Contact
Category Archives:
NJ – Punitive Damages
MARCH 2016 BAD FAITH CASES: (1) BAD FAITH CLAIM FOR FAILURE TO COMMUNICATE SETTLEMENT DEMANDS WITHIN POLICY LIMITS REQUIRE SAME PROOF UNDER PENNSYLVANIA OR NEW JERSEY LAW; (2) POTENTIAL LOWER STANDARD FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES IN PENNSYLVANIA NOT A BASIS TO DISMISS CLAIM; (3) ACTIONABLE CLAIM AGAINST AN INSURER’S MANAGING AGENT FOR CONTRIBUTION (New Jersey Federal)
March 31, 2016
SEPTEMBER 2015 BAD FAITH CASES: COURT (1) FINDS CLAIM FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING SUBSUMED IN COUNT FOR BAD FAITH; AND (2) DISMISSES DEMANDS FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY’S FEES IN FIRST PARTY BREACH OF CONTRACT/BAD FAITH CASE (New Jersey Federal)
September 11, 2015
SEPTEMBER 2015 BAD FAITH CASES: COURT (1) FINDS CLAIM FOR BREACH OF IMPLIED COVENANT OF GOOD FAITH AND FAIR DEALING SUBSUMED IN COUNT FOR BAD FAITH; AND (2) DISMISSES DEMANDS FOR PUNITIVE DAMAGES AND ATTORNEY’S FEES IN FIRST PARTY BREACH OF CONTRACT/BAD FAITH CASE (New Jersey Federal)
September 7, 2015
MARCH 2015 BAD FAITH CASES: PLAINTIFF STATED BAD FAITH CLAIM WHEN ALLEGING THAT INSURER’S ADJUSTER ADMITTED A BASIS FOR LOSS AS TO WHICH COVERAGE WAS DUE, BUT INSURER LATER DENIED COVERAGE (New Jersey Federal)
March 19, 2015
←
Older posts
Recent News and Court Decisions
Upcoming Event – CLE PBA: Update 2022
Tips for condo owners in wake of deadly Surfside, Florida collapse
Video Available Now for 4/21/21 Webinar – Condos & Covid in 2021: What’s Different and What’s the Same in Operating and Governance Issues
Firm’s Business Courts Blog reports Judge Glazer’s Commerce Court tenure ends, with his final ruling addressing Covid-19
House Oversight Subcommittee Hearing on the U.S. Postal Service
The Deadline to Appeal Your 2020 Real Estate Tax Assessment in Philadelphia is October 5, 2020
Why Trump’s threat to Postal Service is a threat to democracy
Archives
Archives
Select Month
March 2022
July 2021
May 2021
April 2021
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
January 2020
October 2019
September 2019
June 2019
April 2019
January 2019
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
January 2018
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
January 2005
October 2004
September 2004
November 2003
July 2003
April 2002
January 2001
Categories
Categories
Select Category
Court Decisions Dynamic
News Court Decisions
News Dynamic
NJ – Claims Handling Procedures
NJ – Coverage Issues
NJ – Discovery and Evidence
NJ – Experts
NJ – General Bad Faith and Litigation Issues
NJ – Lawyer’s-Attorney’s Fees
NJ – Litigation Conduct
NJ – Procedural Issues
NJ – Punitive Damages
NJ- Reverse Bad Faith
PA – Claims Handling Procedures
PA – Coverage Issues
PA – Discovery and Evidence
PA – Experts
PA – General Bad Faith and Litigation Issues
PA – Lawyer’s – Attorney’s Fees
PA – Litigation Conduct Claims
PA – Procedural Issues
PA – Punitive Damages
PA – Reserves
PA – Reverse Bad Faith
PA-Manuals
Uncategorized
