J. Katz Creations, Ltd. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

J. Katz Creations, Ltd. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance

80 A.D.2d 790, 437 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10587

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

DecidedMarch 17, 1981

StatusPublished

This text of 80 A.D.2d 790 (J. Katz Creations, Ltd. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine 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

J. Katz Creations, Ltd. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance, 80 A.D.2d 790, 437 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10587 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1981).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 13, 1979, granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs and disbursements, and the motion denied. The policy condition that the maximum value of all property in the custody of the insured or any of its employees or salesmen outside of the premises would not exceed $50,000 is clearly a warranty under section 150 of the Insurance Law. (See Grady v Concordia Fire Ins. Co., 267 NY 177.) Moreover, it is binding on the insured despite the absence of the insured’s signature on the indorsement containing the warranty, even though provision was made on the indorsement for the insured’s signed acceptance, since at the time of loss, this indorsement had been part of the policy, in its original form and for two successive renewals, without objection. (See American Express Ry. Co. v Lindenburgh, 260 US 584, 590.) We find, however, an issue of fact as to whether the breach of the warranty materially increased the risk. (See Insurance Law, § 150, subd 2; also Glickman v New York Life Ins. Co., 291 NY 45.) Accordingly, summary judgment should have been denied. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Sullivan, Markewich and Fein, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County, entered December 13, 1979, granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously reversed, on the law, with costs and disbursements, and the motion denied. The policy condition that the maximum value of all property in the custody of the insured or any of its employees or salesmen outside of the premises would not exceed $50,000 is clearly a warranty under section 150 of the Insurance Law. (See Grady v Concordia Fire Ins. Co., 267 NY 177.) Moreover, it is binding on the insured despite the absence of the insured’s signature on the indorsement containing the warranty, even though provision was made on the indorsement for the insured’s signed acceptance, since at the time of loss, this indorsement had been part of the policy, in its original form and for two successive renewals, without objection. (See American Express Ry. Co. v Lindenburgh, 260 US 584, 590.) We find, however, an issue of fact as to whether the breach of the warranty materially increased the risk. (See Insurance Law, § 150, subd 2; also Glickman v New York Life Ins. Co., 291 NY 45.) Accordingly, summary judgment should have been denied. Concur — Murphy, P. J., Sandler, Sullivan, Markewich and Fein, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

80 A.D.2d 790, 437 N.Y.S.2d 10, 1981 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10587, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/j-katz-creations-ltd-v-st-paul-fire-marine-insurance-nyappdiv-1981.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack