Court Opinion

ID: 9678947
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 06:37:08.944028+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T18:17:08.983637
License: Public Domain

Smith and McCown, JJ.,
concurring in result.
The policy provision in our opinion prohibits proof by inventory records that are not trustworthy. An important circumstance is the degree of estimation involved in the inventory system. The probative value of unit-type or perpetual inventory records is ordinarily higher than that of records based chiefly on generalized estimates. The distinction between an “enumeration” and a “computation” of inventory shortage is subtle, productive of confusion, and unserviceable. We cannot formulate a single rule that will satisfactorily cover the innumerable variables of trustworthiness. We concur in the result. See, Hoboken Camera Center, Inc. v. Hartford Acc. & Ind. Co., 93 N. J. Super. 484, 226 A. 2d 439; Kurland, “Claims For Inventory Shortage Resulting From Employee Dishonesty under Fidelity Insurance Bonds— a Present Appraisal,” 33 Ins. Counsel J. 397 (1966); Bunge, “Inventory Shortages,” 20 Ins. Counsel J. 271 (1953).