Association and the Sassanos to have the fire damage to the building structure assessed by the insurance appraisers. If Guastella or Wasyluk is not proved to have set the fire which burned the Sassanos’ building, the insured loss for which BLT will be entitled to recover from Insurance Guaranty Association should be based on the assessment conducted pursuant to the court’s order that was entered on BLT’s motion. The remaining issues are either moot or clearly without merit. R. 2:11-3(e)(1)(E). The judgment appealed from is reversed, and the case is remanded to the trial court for proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. 1 For purposes of a civil action, a judgment of conviction i 199 N.J.Super. 494, 498, 489 4.2d 1231 (App.Div.), certif. denied, 101 N.J. 300, 501 A.2d 958 (1985) (<HOLDING>) with Howell v. Ohio Casualty Ins. Co., 130
holding that an insurer was obligated to pay for damages and a loss in value to a water treatment plant caused by the insureds defective product holding that when an insured suffers a loss but then exaggerates the claim the insurer is released from paying any portion of the claim including the amount of actual loss holding that the debtor could not treat a lessor as a secured creditor by paying the present value of the purchase option price of the lease through her chapter 13 plan holding insurers right to subrogation arises only upon the insurers showing that the sum of the insureds recovery from the insurer and from persons legally responsible for the injury exceeds the insureds loss holding that the insurer did not assume the risk of paying an innocent secured creditor if the insureds sole stockholder intentionally caused the loss