Lackow v. Insurance Co. of North America

52 A.D.2d 579, 382 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12155
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 5, 1976·Published·Cited by 5 cases

Opinion

In an action on an insurance policy, defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, dated September 18, 1975, which, inter alia, (1) denied its motion for summary judgment and (2) granted plaintiff’s cross motion for summary judgment. Order affirmed, with $50 costs and disbursements. The assured’s employee’s position at the time of the robbery, at the rear of the vehicle opening its trunk, was in compliance with the "Jeweler’s Block Policy” provision that he be "actually in or upon such Vehicle” at the time of the loss (cf. Kinscherf Co., v St. Paul Fire & Mar. Ins. Co., 234 App Div 385; Royce Furs v Home Ins. Co., 30 AD2d 238). Hopkins, Acting P. J., Margett, Damiani, Rabin and Hawkins, JJ., concur.

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

Lackow v. Insurance Co. of North America, 52 A.D.2d 579, 382 N.Y.S.2d 529, 1976 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 12155 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1976).

52 A.D.2d 579 (Lackow v. Insurance Co. of North America) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

E.M.M.I. Inc. v. Zurich American Insurance
84 P.3d 385 (California Supreme Court, 2004)
EMMI INC. v. Zurich American Ins. Co.
122 Cal. Rptr. 2d 530 (California Court of Appeal, 2002)
JMP Associates, Inc. v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance
693 A.2d 832 (Court of Appeals of Maryland, 1997)