A recent legal battle has unfolded over a motor vehicle accident involving a rideshare driver, raising questions about insurance coverage and the classification of vehicles under New Jersey law. Jolessa A. Wade filed an appeal on February 12, 2026, in the Superior Court of New Jersey’s Appellate Division against William Strauss and Allstate New Jersey Insurance Company following the dismissal of her complaint on October 25, 2024. Wade seeks to challenge the summary judgment that barred her from claiming damages due to her lack of personal automobile liability insurance at the time of the accident.
The case revolves around an incident that occurred on July 10, 2019, when Wade was driving her Mazda CX7 as an Uber rideshare driver in Newark. She alleges that while providing a prearranged ride through Uber, her vehicle was struck by another car exiting a parking lot. The court initially dismissed Wade’s claims based on the New Jersey Automobile Reparation Reform Act (No-Fault Act), which requires drivers to maintain personal injury protection (PIP) benefits. Wade admitted her insurance had lapsed but argued that under the Transportation Network Company Safety and Regulatory Act (TNCSRA), her vehicle did not qualify as an “automobile” needing PIP coverage during a prearranged ride.
Wade’s argument hinges on whether her vehicle was classified correctly under state law at the time of the accident. According to N.J.S.A. 39:5H-2 of TNCSRA, a “personal vehicle” used for prearranged rides is not considered an “automobile” as defined by the No-Fault Act during such rides. Despite this provision, both William Strauss and Allstate contended that Wade’s lapse in personal insurance rendered her culpably uninsured, thus barring her from seeking damages.
The appellate court found genuine issues of material fact regarding whether Wade’s use of Allstate’s policy through Uber satisfied TNCSRA’s requirements for valid automobile liability insurance during prearranged rides. The declaration sheet from Allstate indicated coverage consistent with TNCSRA standards but lacked explicit PIP benefits required when not engaged in a ride. The court remanded the case for further proceedings to determine if Allstate’s policy provided adequate coverage under TNCSRA at the time of the accident.
Representing Wade is Michele Labrada from Law Offices of Karim Arzadi; Donald S. DeDio and Lauren B. Connell Madia represent William Strauss from Dwyer Connell & Lisbona LLP; Daniel W. Szep represents Allstate from Goetz Schenker Blee & Wiederhorn LLP. Judges Rose and DeAlmeida presided over this appeal under Case ID A-0943-24.
Source: A094324_Wade_v_Strauss_Opinion_New_Jersey_Superior_Court_of_Appeals.pdf
