Cicchetti v. General Accident Insurance

272 A.D.2d 500, 708 N.Y.S.2d 883, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5856
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMay 22, 2000
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 272 A.D.2d 500 (Cicchetti v. General Accident 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
Cicchetti v. General Accident Insurance, 272 A.D.2d 500, 708 N.Y.S.2d 883, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5856 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2000).

Opinion

—In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of an insurance contract, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated June 28, 1999, which denied his motion to compel the defendant to comply with' certain discovery requests and granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The Supreme Court properly granted the defendant’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint. Dismissal of the first cause of action was proper since there was no evidence that the plaintiff sustained damages as a result of the defendant’s alleged breach of the implied covenant to act in good faith (cf., Porter v Allstate Ins. Co., 184 AD2d 685; Flem[501]*501ing v Allstate Ins. Co., 106 AD2d 426, affd 66 NY2d 638, cert denied 475 US 1096). Dismissal of the second cause of action was also proper since Insurance Law § 2601 does not afford an allegedly aggrieved party a private right of action (see, New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., 87 NY2d 308; Rocanova v Equitable Life Assur. Socy., 83 NY2d 603). The plaintiff has no cognizable claim for punitive damages under common-law principles (see, New York Univ. v Continental Ins. Co., supra). Moreover, there is no underlying cause of action upon which a demand for punitive damages could be grounded (see, Rocanova v Equitable Life Assur. Socy., supra).

The plaintiffs remaining contention is without merit. Joy, J. P., Florio, H. Miller and Smith, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Kantrowitz v. Allstate Indemnity Co.
48 A.D.3d 753 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2008)
Lorentzen v. Curtis
280 A.D.2d 525 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
272 A.D.2d 500, 708 N.Y.S.2d 883, 2000 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 5856, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cicchetti-v-general-accident-insurance-nyappdiv-2000.