Starkman v. Sigmond
New Jersey Superior Court
184 N.J.Super. 600, 446 A.2d 1249 (1982)
- Written by Sean Carroll, JD
Facts
Tami Starkman and Dora Birnbaum (plaintiffs) purchased a house from Robert and Barbara Sigmond (defendants), subject to a $60,000 mortgage in favor of the Sigmonds. The mortgage and note did not contain any provision for accelerating payment due to fire. Starkman obtained a fire insurance policy from Prudential Property and Casualty Insurance (Prudential). The policy stated: “Loss, if any, under this policy, shall be payable to the mortgagee named on the first page of this policy . . . in order of precedence of said mortgage.” The house caught fire and was damaged to the point that the building inspector required demolition. Prudential issued checks for a total of $135,000 under the insurance policy for the construction of a new house. Prudential placed $60,000 of the insurance funds in escrow. Both parties moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Deighan, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 804,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.