D.P.M., ET AL.
In this insurance coverage dispute, choice-of-law
analysis requires that New Jersey law apply to a medical
malpractice policy issued in Rhode Island to a doctor who
falsely claimed in his application for insurance that a
majority of his practice was conducted in Rhode Island.
The alleged malpractice occurred in New Jersey upon a New
Jersey resident, and the policy covered the out-of-state
practice of the doctor.
The same analysis and reasoning previously applied in
cases pertaining to compulsory auto insurance leads to the
conclusion that the carrier's remedy of rescission in this
case is limited so that the minimum compulsory amount of
malpractice insurance remains available for an innocent
patient claiming he was injured by the doctor's