August v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

August v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance

284 A.D.2d 355, 725 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6110

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

DecidedJune 11, 2001

StatusPublished

This text of 284 A.D.2d 355 (August v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance) 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

August v. New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance, 284 A.D.2d 355, 725 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6110 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2001).

Pincite

Opinion

—In an action, in effect, for a judgment declaring that the insurance policy issued by the defendant, New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company, provides coverage to Susan Schwartz, the defendant in an underlying personal injury action entitled August v Schwartz, pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, under Index No. 98-00106, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated September 19, 2000, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the entry of an appropriate judgment declaring that the insurance policy issued by the appellant does not cover Susan Schwartz in the underlying action.

We reject the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the appellant’s policy covered Susan Schwartz in the underlying personal injury action. The policy at issue contained a provision specifically excluding Schwartz’s vehicle in the underlying action from liability coverage. Thus, the policy did not extend coverage to Schwartz in the underlying action (see, Jerge v Buettner, 90 NY2d 950; cf., Handelsman v Sea Ins. Co., 85 NY2d 96). Santucci, J. P., S. Miller, Luciano, Feuerstein and Adams, JJ., concur.

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

—In an action, in effect, for a judgment declaring that the insurance policy issued by the defendant, New York Central Mutual Fire Insurance Company, provides coverage to Susan Schwartz, the defendant in an underlying personal injury action entitled August v Schwartz, pending in the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, under Index No. 98-00106, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Seidell, J.), dated September 19, 2000, which denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is granted, the complaint is dismissed, and the matter is remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for the entry of an appropriate judgment declaring that the insurance policy issued by the appellant does not cover Susan Schwartz in the underlying action.

We reject the Supreme Court’s conclusion that the appellant’s policy covered Susan Schwartz in the underlying personal injury action. The policy at issue contained a provision specifically excluding Schwartz’s vehicle in the underlying action from liability coverage. Thus, the policy did not extend coverage to Schwartz in the underlying action (see, Jerge v Buettner, 90 NY2d 950; cf., Handelsman v Sea Ins. Co., 85 NY2d 96). Santucci, J. P., S. Miller, Luciano, Feuerstein and Adams, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

284 A.D.2d 355, 725 N.Y.S.2d 901, 2001 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 6110, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/august-v-new-york-central-mutual-fire-insurance-nyappdiv-2001.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack