Du-wel Prods. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 583 A.2d 316 (N.J. 1990). · Go Syfert
Search
Du-wel Prods. v. United States Fire Ins. Co., 583 A.2d 316 (N.J. 1990). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
59 citation events (24 in the last 25 years) across 6 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Myron Corp. v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Corp. (njsuperctappdiv, 2009-06-05)
Treatment trajectory · 1991 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1991 2008 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 1 distinct citer. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Myron Corp. v. Atlantic Mut. Ins. Corp.
N.J. Super. Ct. App. Div. · 2009 · confidence medium
They are thus procedural rules in the fundamental sense, and we see no reason to withhold their applicability from any litigant having a nexus with this State sufficient to support the prosecution of the claim here. [ Id. at 363, 565 A. 2d 1113 .] Atlantic relies on Du-Wel to support its argument that even if the Illinois federal court, sitting in diversity, had applied New Jersey's substantive insurance coverage law, it would have applied the procedural law of Illinois and therefore would not have awarded Myron its counsel fees, because Illinois law requires an insured to prove that the insur…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Du-Wel Products, Inc., Etc.
v.
United States Fire Insurance Company, Etc.
Supreme Court of New Jersey.
Feb 6, 1990.
583 A.2d 316
Published

Petition for certification denied. (See 236 N.J.Super. 349, 565 A.2d 1113)