Benjamin Aden and Beatrice Aden, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. Robert F. Fortsh, Defendant-Respondent, and Johl &…

Summary

The Supreme Court of New Jersey reversed the Appellate Division and reinstated the jury verdict for the Adens, holding that a policyholder's failure to read an insurance policy cannot be used as a comparative negligence defense in a broker malpractice action. The Court reasoned that brokers owe a fiduciary duty to obtain adequate coverage and that the comparative fault doctrine is precluded when the plaintiff's alleged negligence relates to the task the professional was hired to perform. A dissent argued that the jury should be allowed to consider the plaintiff's failure to read the declarations page.