In Re the Liquidation of the Insurance Corp. of New York

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

In Re the Liquidation of the Insurance Corp. of New York

127 A.D.3d 443, 4 N.Y.S.3d 518

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 7, 2015·No. 401477/09 -14742N 14741 14740·Published

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered November 12, 2013, which denied claimant’s motion to reject the referee’s report, granted defendant’s cross motion to confirm the referee’s report, and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered February 27, 2014, and March 11, 2014, which denied claimant’s motions to renew or reargue its prior motion, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Claimant, First Financial, a judgment creditor of defendant The Insurance Corporation of New York’s (Inscorp) insured, a now defunct contractor, cannot avoid the requirements of the insurance policy simply because it is filing a claim pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420 (b). It has no greater rights than the insured under the policy (see Lang v Hanover Ins. Co., 3 NY3d 350 [2004]), and Inscorp’s 2005 disclaimer of liability for coverage was proper based on the fact that First Financial’s insureds were not named as additional insureds under the Inscorp policy and also on the ground that its notice of claim was untimely (see Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 251 AD2d 216 [1st Dept 1998]).

Concur— Friedman, J.R, Acosta, Moskowitz, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan M. Kenney, J.), entered November 12, 2013, which denied claimant’s motion to reject the referee’s report, granted defendant’s cross motion to confirm the referee’s report, and dismissed the complaint, unanimously affirmed, with costs. Appeals from orders, same court and Justice, entered February 27, 2014, and March 11, 2014, which denied claimant’s motions to renew or reargue its prior motion, unanimously dismissed, without costs.

Claimant, First Financial, a judgment creditor of defendant The Insurance Corporation of New York’s (Inscorp) insured, a now defunct contractor, cannot avoid the requirements of the insurance policy simply because it is filing a claim pursuant to Insurance Law § 3420 (b). It has no greater rights than the insured under the policy (see Lang v Hanover Ins. Co., 3 NY3d 350 [2004]), and Inscorp’s 2005 disclaimer of liability for coverage was proper based on the fact that First Financial’s insureds were not named as additional insureds under the Inscorp policy and also on the ground that its notice of claim was untimely (see Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co. v National Union Fire Ins. Co. of Pittsburgh, Pa., 251 AD2d 216 [1st Dept 1998]).

Concur— Friedman, J.R, Acosta, Moskowitz, Richter and Kapnick, JJ.

In Re the Liquidation of the Insurance Corp. of New York, 127 A.D.3d 443, 4 N.Y.S.3d 518 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2015).

Pincite

127 A.D.3d 443 (In Re the Liquidation of the Insurance Corp. of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related