Hartford Insurance Group v. Carlson Equipment Corp.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Hartford Insurance Group v. Carlson Equipment Corp.

101 A.D.2d 852, 475 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18528

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

DecidedMay 21, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 101 A.D.2d 852 (Hartford Insurance Group v. Carlson Equipment Corp.) 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

Hartford Insurance Group v. Carlson Equipment Corp., 101 A.D.2d 852, 475 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18528 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action for a declaratory judgment that defendant Crum & Forster Insurance Companies (North River Insurance Company) is the primary insurer of a certain leased vehicle, that defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Geiler, J.), dated October 28, 1983, which declared that it was “estopped” from denying that it was the primary insurance carrier. H Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the words “is hereby estopped from denying it”, and by adding after the word “carrier”, the following: “with respect to the accident which occurred on November 16, 1978, involving a vehicle leased by defendant Carlson Equipment Corporation to defendant George W. Walsh Contracting Corporation.” As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. H Although Special Term properly noted that appellant was the primary insurer, its decretal paragraph inartfully included the words “is hereby es-topped from denying it”, rather than simply declaring the rights between Crum & Forster and the Hartford Insurance Group. We have modified the decretal paragraph accordingly. Bracken, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

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

In an action for a declaratory judgment that defendant Crum & Forster Insurance Companies (North River Insurance Company) is the primary insurer of a certain leased vehicle, that defendant appeals from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Geiler, J.), dated October 28, 1983, which declared that it was “estopped” from denying that it was the primary insurance carrier. H Judgment modified, on the law, by deleting the words “is hereby estopped from denying it”, and by adding after the word “carrier”, the following: “with respect to the accident which occurred on November 16, 1978, involving a vehicle leased by defendant Carlson Equipment Corporation to defendant George W. Walsh Contracting Corporation.” As so modified, judgment affirmed, without costs or disbursements. H Although Special Term properly noted that appellant was the primary insurer, its decretal paragraph inartfully included the words “is hereby es-topped from denying it”, rather than simply declaring the rights between Crum & Forster and the Hartford Insurance Group. We have modified the decretal paragraph accordingly. Bracken, J. P., Niehoff, Rubin and Eiber, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

101 A.D.2d 852, 475 N.Y.S.2d 798, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 18528, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hartford-insurance-group-v-carlson-equipment-corp-nyappdiv-1984.