KATHLEEN GIOVINAZZI v. ROBERT L. REA

 

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-1177-05T21177-05T2

KATHLEEN GIOVINAZZI,

Plaintiff,

v.

ROBERT L. REA,

Defendant.

_____________________________________

DAVID J. RUIZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

ROBERT L. REA and

KATHLEEN GIOVINAZZI,

Defendants-Respondents.

______________________________________

 

Argued June 13, 2006 - Decided June 30, 2006

Before Judges Conley and Cuff.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Cumberland County, L-869-03, L-309-04.

S. Caroline Granato argued the cause for appellant (Radano & Lide, attorneys; Melville D. Lide, on the brief).

Brian D. Barr argued the cause for respondent Robert L. Rea (Cooper Levenson, attorneys; Mr. Barr, on the brief).

Edward N. Romanik argued the cause for respondent Kathleen A. Giovinazzi (Powell, Birchmeier & Powell, attorneys; Mr. Romanik, on the brief).

PER CURIAM

Plaintiff, David J. Ruiz, appeals summary judgment granted defendants in his personal injury automobile litigation. Summary judgment was granted dismissing his complaint premised upon the motion judge's conclusion that plaintiff, who at the time of the accident was operating his mother's vehicle, was subject to his mother's election of the limitation on lawsuit (verbal threshold) tort option, pursuant to N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8a, -8.1a. In so concluding, the judge said:

And as we have seen, this young man who was 18 at the time of the accident had moved from his mother's home to Florida. After three months, for whatever reason, he moved back to New Jersey to continue with Vineland High School, where he lived with his aunt. And plaintiff asserts that there's no[t] sufficient connection in that household, formerly - of his mother's - to subject him to the verbal threshold. [But] . . . he had a number of connections with his mother's household. His mail continued to go there. He used her house as an identification of residence for various purposes. He [used it for] school and other purposes. . . .

There are so many connections that this young man continues to look to his mother and use that residence for purposes other than residing, such as mail, that in - and such is identified with respect to certain institutions. School and others - that it cannot be found that he does not have sufficient connection with his mother's household to escape the . . . verbal threshold.

And for that reason and in the Summary Judgment context, giving all inferences that can be given to plaintiff - nevertheless, under these facts, although he wasn't living there, he had so substantial a connection with his mother's household that he is subject to the verbal threshold.

On appeal, plaintiff contends:

A. PURSUANT TO THE TERMS OF N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8, AS APPLIED TO THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF DAVID J. RUIZ, THE CLAIMS OF PLAINTIFF FOR NON-ECONOMIC LOSSES ARISING OUT OF THE MARCH 18, 2002 AUTOMOBILE ACCIDENT ARE NOT SUBJECT TO ANY LIMITATION ON LAWSUIT THRESHOLD SINCE PLAINTIFF WAS NOT AN "IMMEDIATE FAMILY MEMBER" OF THE POLICY HOLDER AS DEFINED IN N.J.S.A. 39:6A-8.1.

We disagree. Despite his residency elsewhere, plaintiff's undisputed connections with his mother are sufficient to bind him to her election. Roman v. Correa, 352 N.J. Super. 124, 127-29 (App. Div. 2002). Cf. Gibson v. Callaghan, 158 N.J. 662-67 (1999).

 
Affirmed.

(continued)

(continued)

3

A-1177-05T2

June 30, 2006