Case ID: nj-super_175/html/0501-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

CLINTON GRIGGS, AN INFANT BY HIS GUARDIAN AD LITEM, SUMNER GRIGGS AND SUMNER GRIGGS, INDIVIDUALLY, PLAINTIFFS, v. WILLIAM BERTRAM ET AL., DEFENDANT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT, v. THE FRANKLIN MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
    Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division
    Argued September 9, 1980
    Decided September 23, 1980.
    
      Before Judges FRITZ, POLOW and JOELSON.
    
      Bernard F. Boglioii argued the cause for appellant (Boglioii, Stamelman & Stein, attorneys; Lawrence S. Reynolds on the brief).
    
      Edward K. Zuckerman argued the cause for respondent (Rosenhouse, Cutler & Zuckerman, attorneys; Edward K. Zuckerman on the brief).
   PER CURIAM.

The facts, essentially undisputed, appear in the published opinion of the trial judge, 163 N.J.Super. 87, 394 A.2d 174 (Law Div. 1978). We affirm.

No bad faith on the part of the settling parties appears, despite the unique nature of the arrangement. The disclaiming insurance company, appellant here, did not demonstrate that the settlement was unreasonable. Indeed, rather it asks us to impose on the settling parties the burden of proof with respect to the reasonableness of the settlement despite the fact of the company’s belated disclaimer. We decline thus to burden a disappointed insured with that which amounts to a presumption of unreasonableness at the behest of an insurance company which voluntarily removed itself from the fray.

In the circumstances of this particular case we affirm substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Hamlin.