Legal Question in Traffic Law in New Jersey

Was involved in an accident that was not my fault, other party is 100% at fault, my vehicle has been damaged significantly. I have an injury lawyer but they do not handle the actual property damage to my vehicle. My vehicle was in excellent condition prior to the accident now damaged to the point where it is unsafe to drive. The repairs to address the damages are $2000+ Progressive has refused to fix any of the mechanical issues instead they just performed shoddy incomplete cosmetic repairs yet the serious underlying damages have never been repaired. What is the best course of action to take in order to hold Progressive or the Driver of the vehicle that caused the accident responsible? To this point we have already filed complaint with Progressive and the BBB and nothing has come of it but complete denials. I have all service records that have been performed regularly. After the accident the vehicle is pulling/vibrating all over the road and the damages to the suspension are so bad an alignment can not be performed. Progressive claimed to fully inspect the entire vehicle for damages yet they returned it to us with a completely destroyed spare tire and wheel underneath the vehicle.


Asked on 3/10/17, 11:19 am

1 Answer from Attorneys
Jef Henninger, Esq Law Offices of Jef Henninger, Esq.

I don't see how you can raise this issue separate and apart from the other claim. See

The entire controversy doctrine, set forth in Rule 4:30A, requires parties to raise all transactionally related claims in the same action and imposes a preclusive effect on claims that are not so joined. K-Land Corp. v. Landis Sewerage Auth., 173 N.J. 59, 69-71 (2002). Specifically, Rule 4:30A states: �Nonjoinder of claims required to be joined by the entire controversy doctrine shall result in the preclusion of the omitted claims to the extent required by the entire controversy doctrine[.]� The doctrine reflects �our long-held preference that related claims and matters arising among related parties be adjudicated together rather than in separate, successive, fragmented, or piecemeal litigation.� Kent Motor Cars, Inc. v. Reynolds and Reynolds, Co., 207 N.J. 428, 443 (2011). See also Cogdell v. Hosp. Ctr. at Orange, 116 N.J. 7, 23 (1989) (noting �[f]ragmented and multiple litigation� is detrimental to the parties, the judicial system, and the public).

Read more
Answered on 3/10/17, 11:29 am


Related Questions & Answers

More Traffic Law questions and answers in New Jersey