Plaintiff Calise Belin was injured in a two vehicle accident after stopping at a stop sign on Lafayette Road in Voorhees, preparing to turn left on Haddonfield-Berlin Road. Plaintiff looked both ways and not seeing anyone coming, turned left. She collided with a vehicle being driven by Debra Lawless-Gattone who was travelling northbound on Haddonfield-Berlin Road. The issue in Belin v. New Jersey Manufacturers Ins. Co., 2022 N.J. Super. Unpub. LEXIS 1400 (App. Div. Aug. 5, 2022), was whether Plaintiff Belin was more than 50% at fault, precluding her from recovering any underinsured motorist benefits from her insurance company, NJM.
Plaintiff had been driving to a basketball game after work in a car owned by her parents. At the time of the accident, it was dark and rainy. The other driver, Lawless-Gattone, was on her way to pick up her son from hockey practice. She was in the left lane of Haddonfield-Berlin Road, deciding whether to move to the right lane when she saw Plaintiff’s car approach the stop sign on Lafayette Road. She was satisfied that Plaintiff would stop and checked her rear view mirror to see if it was safe to move into the right lane. Lawless-Gattone’s path of travel was not controlled by any traffic sign or signal. When she turned back, Plaintiff was coming out of Lafayette Road, turning in front of her. She braked and turned her wheel in an attempt to avoid Plaintiff but did not have sufficient time to stop before colliding with Plaintiff’s driver’s side door.
Plaintiff claimed that she stopped and that the fault of the accident lay with Lawless-Gattone because she hit Plaintiff. She claims that Lawless-Gattone could have paid better attention to avoid the accident. Plaintiff claimed that Lawless-Gattone was speeding or, at least, driving too fast for existing weather conditions. She also alleged that Lawless-Gattone was distracted by looking around to change lanes.
Under New Jersey law, it was the Plaintiff’s burden to establish that Lawless-Gattone was at least 50 percent negligent for the accident to permit Plaintiff to recover against NJM (for underinsured motorist benefits). The trial court judge, Judge Belgard, disagreed with Plaintiff’s claim that Lawless-Gattone was at fault and dismissed the case. Although Lawless-Gattone may have given different statements about the speed limit on Haddonfield-Berlin Road where the accident happened, her testimony was consistent that she was not speeding. Plaintiff offered no contrary testimony. The judge also found no evidence in the record that Lawless-Gattone was distracted.
This decision was appealed to the Appellate Division, which agreed with the trial court judge. Plaintiff had failed to offer evidence “to permit a rational factfinder to conclude Lawless-Gattone was speeding or distracted or that plaintiff who was making a left turn in front of Lawless-Gattone from a side street controlled by a stop sign, had the right of way, even when viewed in the light most favorable to plaintiff.” To prevent summary judgment from being granted, a plaintiff must “demonstrate by competent evidential material that a genuine issue of fact existed.” The Court noted that plaintiff failed to do so and affirmed the entry of summary judgment in favor of NJM, dismissing the lawsuit.
