New Jersey Diminished Value Law
Under New Jersey law, “the general primary rule is that in the absence of the total destruction of an automobile, the measure of damages is the difference in its value immediately before and after the injury.” Jones v. Lahn, 1 N.J. 358, 362, 63 A.2d 804 (1949) (citing Hintz v. Roberts, 98 N.J.L. 768, 121 A. 711 (E. & A.1923)).
New Jersey Courts had clarified this rule by explaining that if the value of an automobile before it was damaged was more significant than after repair, the owner is entitled to a sum for the depreciated value of the automobile, in addition to the repair cost. Fanfarillo v. Eastend Motor Company, 172 N.J.Super. 309, 411 A.2d 1167 (Sup. Ct. N.J., Appellate Division) [emphasis added].
Stated another way, when repairs still leave the vehicle in a less valuable condition than immediately before the accident, a plaintiff is entitled to prove his full damages by proving the cost of repair and the depreciated value after repair or by showing the value of the vehicle immediately before and after the accident. Premier XXI Claims Mgmt v. Rigstad, 381 N.J.Super. 281, 885 A.2d 521 (Sup Ct Appellate Div 2005).
