The American Insurance Association, the Property Casualty Insurers Association of America (PCI), and New Jersey Manufacturers Insurance Company of West Trenton were critical of the ruling. They said the decision would unravel the progress made on auto reform in New Jersey, and would mean consumers would eventually pay more for their auto insurance.

"The court's ruling flies in the face of clear legislative intent and effectively nullifies the choices New Jersey drivers made to achieve lower rates," said David Snyder, AIA vice president and assistant general counsel.

"Until today, New Jersey drivers benefited from a balanced no-fault system--consumers enjoyed a substantial premium reduction by agreeing not to file 'pain and suffering' suits over minor injuries," said Anthony G. Dickson, president and CEO of NJM Insurance Co. "Now, lawsuits over minor injuries will flood the system, with these costs ultimately being borne by our policyholders."

"[The] decision will indisputably limit consumers' choices and will open the door to thousands of minor lawsuits flooding the system," said Richard Stokes, regional vice president for PCI. "This decision essentially puts the brakes on positive auto insurance reform in this state which is harmful to all New Jersey drivers."

In a concurring opinion, Justice Roberto A. Rivera-Soto said it would be up to the legislature to fix the language to limit threshold.

Justice Jaynee LaVecchia did not participate in the decision.

Until passage of the auto reform act, many carriers refused to do business in the state or were seeking to leave. After its passage, GEICO and a number of insurers re-entered the state, while State Farm and American International Group changed their mind about leaving the auto market.