Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Globe Office Supply Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Globe Office Supply Co.

266 A.D.2d 165, 699 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12364

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 30, 1999·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered July 10, 1998, which, in an action by an insurer against its insured’s principals and others, arising out of an allegedly fraudulent claim under a fire insurance policy, denied defendants-appellants’ motion to dismiss the action pursuant to CPLR 3016 (b), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs allegation that the nonappealing individual defendant, the employee of plaintiffs adjuster primarily responsible for working on the subject loss, pleaded guilty to Federal mail fraud charges accusing him of devising a scheme to falsely misrepresent the extent of such loss to plaintiff, gives appellants, principals of the insured, adequate notice of the fraud that plaintiff is accusing them of as well. Plaintiff cannot presently be expected to state further details of appellants’ participation in such fraud, if any, such being a matter peculiarly within [166] appellants’ knowledge (see, Bernstein v Kelso & Co., 231 AD2d 314, 320-321). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Rubin, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

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

—Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered July 10, 1998, which, in an action by an insurer against its insured’s principals and others, arising out of an allegedly fraudulent claim under a fire insurance policy, denied defendants-appellants’ motion to dismiss the action pursuant to CPLR 3016 (b), unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Plaintiffs allegation that the nonappealing individual defendant, the employee of plaintiffs adjuster primarily responsible for working on the subject loss, pleaded guilty to Federal mail fraud charges accusing him of devising a scheme to falsely misrepresent the extent of such loss to plaintiff, gives appellants, principals of the insured, adequate notice of the fraud that plaintiff is accusing them of as well. Plaintiff cannot presently be expected to state further details of appellants’ participation in such fraud, if any, such being a matter peculiarly within [166] appellants’ knowledge (see, Bernstein v Kelso & Co., 231 AD2d 314, 320-321). Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Tom, Rubin, Andrias and Buckley, JJ.

Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Globe Office Supply Co., 266 A.D.2d 165, 699 N.Y.S.2d 347, 1999 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12364 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

266 A.D.2d 165 (Commerce & Industry Insurance v. Globe Office Supply Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related