United States ex rel. Salters v. American Family Care, Inc.

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that “New Jersey courts [are] reluctant to infer a statutory private right of action”
• holding that despite a textual basis for identifying insurance agents as beneficiaries, they were “not members of the class for whose special benefit [the statute] was enacted” because the purpose of the statute was “to benefit New Jersey auto insureds, not insurance agents”
• explaining standard for determining whether a violation of a statute supports a private cause of action
• allowing state common-law breach of good faith and fair dealing claim even though claim rested on allegations of violation of the Fair Automobile Insurance Reform Act of 1990, chapter 17:33B-1 N.J. Statutes Annotated, and that act did not confer a private right of action
• “New Jersey courts have been reluctant to infer a statutory private right of action where the Legislature has not expressly provided for such an action.
• New Jersey courts have been reluctant to infer a statutory private right of action where the Legislature has not expressly provided for such an action.

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).