Re: Woodworth v. Joyce

To The Companies In Interest:

In Woodworth v. Joyce, 373 N.J. Super. 114 (App. Div 2004), the court addressed whether an intoxicated tortfeasor is precluded from asserting the verbal threshold defense.

N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b) provides that a person who is convicted of, or pleads guilty to, operating a motor vehicle while under the influence of alcohol shall have no cause of action for the recovery of economic or non-economic loss. In Woodworth, the plaintiff, Edward Woodworth, was involved in an automobile accident with defendant, Peter Joyce. Woodworth's insurance policy was subject to the verbal threshold. Joyce had a blood alcohol content of .16 and pleaded guilty to DUI. The plaintiff argued that defendant should be precluded from asserting the verbal threshold as an affirmative defense because his actions were "intentional and deliberately reckless." The Law Division held that N.J.S.A 39:6A-4.5(b) bars defendant from asserting the verbal threshold defense. The Law Division relied upon New Jersey's public policy of discouraging drivers from operating their vehicles while under the influence of alcohol.

The Appellate Division reversed concluding that the provisions of N.J.S.A. 39:6A-4.5(b) are directed exclusively at a claimant who shall have no cause of action if he pleads to, or is found, guilty of DUI. The statute is not directed at defendant drunk drivers, and they are not prohibited from asserting the verbal threshold defense.

Should you have any questions about the above, please do not hesitate to contact me.

Very truly yours,

Glendon E. Danks

For further information, please contact Glendon E. Danks, Esquire.
Telephone: 856-751-5285
E-mail: danks@bbs-law.com