SYLLABUS

(This syllabus is not part of the opinion of the Court. It has been prepared by the Office of the Clerk for the convenience of the reader. It has been neither reviewed nor approved by the Supreme Court. Please note that, in the interests of brevity, portions of any opinion may not have been summarized).

Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company v. Robert LaCroix, et al. (A-128-06)

Argued November 28, 2007 -- Decided May 14, 2008

LaVECCHIA, J., writing for a unanimous Court.

In this appeal the Court is asked whether an eighteen-year-old girl, injured while driving her father’s automobile, should be barred from personal-injury-protection (PIP) benefits under her father’s automobile insurance policy because, unbeknownst to her, her father had not identified her as a household resident in his insurance application.

In an admitted attempt to secure lower premium payments, Robert LaCroix intentionally failed to disclose that Chrissy, the youngest of his three daughters, resided in his household. LaCroix only listed his two older daughters, each of whom had her own car and insurance policy. Thus, LaCroix withheld information only about the sole uninsured motorist in his household, Chrissy. Based on that information, Rutgers Casualty Insurance Company (Rutgers Casualty) issued a policy effective August 16, 2002.