Voorhees v. Preferred Mutual Insurance Co.
New Jersey Supreme Court
607 A.2d 1255 (1992)
- Written by Noah Lewis, JD
Facts
At a public school-board meeting, Eileen Voorhees (plaintiff) and others questioned the mental fitness and competency of her child’s schoolteacher and asked that the teacher be removed from the classroom. Voorhees had no physical contact with the teacher. The teacher was temporarily relieved of duties and forced to undergo a psychiatric examination. The teacher experienced a great deal of emotional distress because of the incident. According to the teacher’s psychiatrist, the teacher experienced an undue number of physical symptoms including headaches, stomach pains, nausea, and body pains. The teacher sued Voorhees for defamation and emotional distress. Voorhees had a homeowner’s insurance policy through Preferred Mutual Insurance Co. (Preferred Mutual) (defendant) that required Preferred Mutual to defend Voorhees in any suit resulting from bodily injury, defined as “bodily harm, sickness or disease.” Preferred Mutual refused to defend Voorhees in the case, which settled for $750. Voorhees spent more than $14,000 defending the suit and sued Preferred Mutual for breach of contract. Following cross-motions for summary judgment, the trial court granted Preferred Mutual’s motion. The appellate court reversed, and Preferred Mutual appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Garibaldi, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 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.