06-09-08 A-3735-06T3
The issue in this case deals with the choice of law principles concerning the payment of PIP benefits with respect to a New Jersey resident injured as a passenger in a car registered and insured in New York but treated in New Jersey. (Under New York law PIP coverage is provided by the host vehicle, while in New Jersey the injured patient is covered by his resident brother's carrier). An actual conflict of law exists both with respect to primary coverage and apportionment if both policies are primary. New Jersey law controls and there shall be an equal contribution by the carriers up to the limits of the New York policy. The issue of PIP coverage of an insured who is a resident of New Jersey where the policy was issued and treatment was provided, because of its greater interest in protecting the injured resident and assuring his or her medical care and payment of the New Jersey provider.
