Kassis v. Royal Insurance Co. of America

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Kassis v. Royal Insurance Co. of America

191 A.D.2d 384, 595 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3219

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

DecidedMarch 30, 1993

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 191 A.D.2d 384 (Kassis v. Royal Insurance Co. of America) 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

Kassis v. Royal Insurance Co. of America, 191 A.D.2d 384, 595 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3219 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Peter Tom, J.), entered May 15, 1992, which dismissed for failure to state a cause of action those portions of the third and fifth causes of action in the complaint which sought punitive damages and attorney’s fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs’ third and fifth causes of action failed to sufficiently allege that defendants’ conduct in failing to repair the subject property and to adjust or settle these claims was directed at the general public (see, Supreme Automotive Mfg. Corp. v Continental Cas. Co., 126 AD2d 153, lv dismissed 69 NY2d 1038). The demand for attorney’s fees cannot stand in the absence of a viable claim for punitive damages (Jacobson v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 120 AD2d 433, 435). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ross and Asch, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Peter Tom, J.), entered May 15, 1992, which dismissed for failure to state a cause of action those portions of the third and fifth causes of action in the complaint which sought punitive damages and attorney’s fees, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiffs’ third and fifth causes of action failed to sufficiently allege that defendants’ conduct in failing to repair the subject property and to adjust or settle these claims was directed at the general public (see, Supreme Automotive Mfg. Corp. v Continental Cas. Co., 126 AD2d 153, lv dismissed 69 NY2d 1038). The demand for attorney’s fees cannot stand in the absence of a viable claim for punitive damages (Jacobson v New York Prop. Ins. Underwriting Assn., 120 AD2d 433, 435). Concur — Murphy, P. J., Milonas, Ross and Asch, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 A.D.2d 384, 595 N.Y.S.2d 690, 1993 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3219, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/kassis-v-royal-insurance-co-of-america-nyappdiv-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack