American Home Assur. Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

American Home Assur. Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.

123 A.D.3d 633, 1 N.Y.S.3d 29

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedDecember 30, 2014

Docket13853N 651096/12

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 123 A.D.3d 633 (American Home Assur. Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Home Assur. Co. v. Port Auth. of N.Y. & N.J., 123 A.D.3d 633, 1 N.Y.S.3d 29 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2014, which granted defendant The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s (defendant) motion for attorneys’ fees, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

“[A]n insured who is cast in a defensive posture by the legal steps an insurer takes in an effort to free itself from its policy obligations, and who prevails on the merits, may recover attorneys’ fees incurred in defending against the insurer’s action” (U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co. v City Club Hotel, LLC, 3 NY3d 592, 597-598 [2004] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, the motion court correctly determined that defendant is entitled to the legal fees incurred in connection with its prior successful motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for declaratory relief. Defendant’s counterclaim is a mirror image of the declaratory claim asserted against it by plaintiff, its insurer. Accordingly, the counterclaim did not cast plaintiff in a defensive posture (compare West 56th St. Assoc. v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co., 250 AD2d 109, 114 [1st Dept 1998] [successful insureds in a declaratory judgment action were not entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs since the insurer’s counterclaim was “redundant and mere surplusage” and did not “cast (the insureds) in a defensive posture”]).

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Eileen Bransten, J.), entered on or about June 4, 2014, which granted defendant The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey’s (defendant) motion for attorneys’ fees, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

“[A]n insured who is cast in a defensive posture by the legal steps an insurer takes in an effort to free itself from its policy obligations, and who prevails on the merits, may recover attorneys’ fees incurred in defending against the insurer’s action” (U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co. v City Club Hotel, LLC, 3 NY3d 592, 597-598 [2004] [internal quotation marks omitted]). Here, the motion court correctly determined that defendant is entitled to the legal fees incurred in connection with its prior successful motion for summary judgment on its counterclaim for declaratory relief. Defendant’s counterclaim is a mirror image of the declaratory claim asserted against it by plaintiff, its insurer. Accordingly, the counterclaim did not cast plaintiff in a defensive posture (compare West 56th St. Assoc. v Greater N.Y. Mut. Ins. Co., 250 AD2d 109, 114 [1st Dept 1998] [successful insureds in a declaratory judgment action were not entitled to attorneys’ fees and costs since the insurer’s counterclaim was “redundant and mere surplusage” and did not “cast (the insureds) in a defensive posture”]).

Concur — Sweeny, J.P., Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Gische, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

123 A.D.3d 633, 1 N.Y.S.3d 29, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-home-assur-co-v-port-auth-of-ny-nj-nyappdiv-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack