Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comFirm Insights
Author: Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC
Date: March 23, 2020
The Firm
201-896-4100 info@sh-law.comThe New Jersey Legislature is working quickly to enact legislation aimed to lessen the impact of Coronavirus on small businesses. One bill seeks to increase the availability of business interruption insurance by eliminating a common exclusion that excludes virus-related losses.
Business interruption insurance policies may not cover some losses related to COVID-19. Under many policies, the question of coverage begins with whether physical loss or damage to the insured’s own property has occurred. From about 1966 until 2006, virus contamination would be covered under most policies.
In July 2006, the Insurance Services Office (ISO) submitted an exclusion for loss due to virus or bacteria, which, based upon a contrary representation by ISO that virus contamination was not intended to be covered, regulators approved. The exclusion states that it applies to income lost due to business interruption, expressly referencing the SARs outbreak of 2003. While ISO developed a rider to provide an insured with the option of purchasing specific coverage that would apply to disease outbreaks, state regulators have apparently not yet approved it.
Assembly Bill No. 3844 aims to ensure that New Jersey businesses that suffer losses due to interruption as a result of the coronavirus pandemic can recover those losses from their insurer so long as they had a business interruption insurance policy in force on March 9, 2020, which is when Gov. Murphy declared a Public Health Emergency and State of Emergency. The bill would apply to businesses covered by such a policy with less than 100 eligible employees (full-time employee who works a normal workweek of 25 or more hours) in the State of New Jersey.
“This bill is intended to hold harmless a certain portion of the business sector, which had the foresight to purchase business interruption insurance, for losses sustained as a result of the current health emergency, but for which no such coverage is currently offered,” the proposed legislation states.
AB 3844 specifically provides that every insurance policy that includes the loss of use and occupancy and business interruption, in force on the date of the executive order, must be construed to include among the covered perils under that policy, coverage for business interruption due to global virus transmission or pandemic, as provided in the Governor’s executive order. The coverage provided would be subject to the limits under the policy and would indemnify the insured for losses incurred during the State of Emergency.
The legislation further provides that an insurer which indemnifies an insured who has filed a claim pursuant to its provisions may apply to the Commissioner of Banking and Insurance (Commissioner) for relief and reimbursement from funds collected and made available for this purpose. The Commissioner would be required to establish procedures for the submission and qualification of claims by insurers that are eligible for reimbursement.
Finally, AB 3844 authorizes the Commissioner to impose upon, distribute among, and collect from insurance companies, other than life and health insurance companies, the additional amounts as may be necessary to recover the amounts paid pursuant to the bill. The additional special-purpose apportionment authorized by the bill would be distributed according to essentially the same procedures and calculations as are provided currently for the existing special-purpose apportionment.
On March 16, the Assembly Homeland Security and State Preparedness Committee advanced AB 3844. However, it has failed to proceed to a final vote in the Assembly. According to sponsors, they are still working out several details. “A-3844 is a work in progress,” co-sponsor Assemblywoman Annette Chaparro stated. “We are working on finalizing the legislation to ensure it is the fairest and most responsible bill possible.”
Even if enacted, the legislation is likely to face legal challenges. Because the bill arguably alters private contractual relations, challengers may argue that it violates both the New Jersey and U.S. Constitution. In these challenges and in other private litigation, the representations made in 2006 and the state of coverage prior to 2006 are likely to be disputed. Given the potential impact of AB 3844, both insurers and policyholders should closely monitor the proposed bill.
If you have questions or if you would like to discuss the matter further, please contact me, Charles Yuen, or the Scarinci Hollenbeck attorney with whom you work, at 201-896-4100.
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Special purpose acquisition companies (better known as SPACs) appear to be making a comeback. SPAC offerings for 2025 have already nearly surpassed last year’s totals, with additional transactions in the pipeline. SPACs last experienced a boom between 2020–2021, with approximately 600 U.S. companies raising a record $163 billion in 2021. Notable companies that went public […]
Author: Dan Brecher
Merging two companies is a complex legal and business transaction. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process that involves important corporate governance considerations. A short form merger, in which an acquiring company merges with a subsidiary corporation, offers a more streamlined process. However, […]
Author: Dan Brecher
The Trump Administration’s new tariffs are having an oversized impact on small businesses, which already tend to operate on razor thin margins. Many businesses have been forced to raise prices, find new suppliers, lay off staff, and delay growth plans. For businesses facing even more dire financial circumstances, there are additional tariff response options, including […]
Author: Brian D. Spector
Business partnerships, much like marriages, function exceptionally well when partners are aligned but can become challenging when disagreements arise. Partnership disputes often stem from conflicts over business strategy, financial management, and unclear role definitions among partners. Understanding Business Partnership Conflicts Partnership conflicts place significant stress on businesses, making proactive measures essential. Partnerships should establish detailed […]
Author: Christopher D. Warren
*** The original article was featured on Bloomberg Tax, April 28, 2025 — As a tax attorney who spends much of my time helping people and companies who have large, unresolved issues with the IRS or one or more state tax departments, it often occurs to me that the best service that I can provide […]
Author: Scott H. Novak
On January 28, 2025, the Trump Administration terminated Gwynne Wilcox from her position as a Member of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB or the Board). Gwynne Wilcox, a union side lawyer for Levy Ratner, was confirmed to the Board for an original term in 2021 and confirmed again for a successive five-year term expiring […]
Author: Matthew F. Mimnaugh
No Aspect of the advertisement has been approved by the Supreme Court. Results may vary depending on your particular facts and legal circumstances.
Consider subscribing to our Firm Insights mailing list by clicking the button below so you can keep up to date with the firm`s latest articles covering various legal topics.
Stay informed and inspired with the latest updates, insights, and events from Scarinci Hollenbeck. Our resource library provides valuable content across a range of categories to keep you connected and ahead of the curve.
Let`s get in touch!
Sign up to get the latest from the Scarinci Hollenbeck, LLC attorneys!