Loerzel v. American Fidelity Fire Insurance

281 A.D. 735, 118 N.Y.S.2d 180, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3375
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedDecember 30, 1952
StatusPublished
Cited by10 cases

This text of 281 A.D. 735 (Loerzel v. American Fidelity Fire 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
Loerzel v. American Fidelity Fire Insurance, 281 A.D. 735, 118 N.Y.S.2d 180, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3375 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1952).

Opinion

Appeal from a summary judgment, and the order directing the same, granted against the defendant insurance company at a Special Term of the Supreme Court for Albany County, entered in Ulster County. Plaintiff hertofore recovered a judgment for personal injuries against the Oswego Stevedoring & Trucking Company, Inc., and several other defendants, in an action arising out of a collision between a ear in which plaintiff was riding and a truck owned by the trucking company. This judgment was affirmed, on appeal {Loerzel v. Carnright, 279 App. Div. 825, motion for leave to appeal denied 303 N. Y. 1014). The record in this ease clearly reveals that the jury found two trucks of the trucking company were involved in the accident, and both drivers were guilty of negligence in the operation thereof. The present action was brought by plaintiff directly against the defendant insurance company to recover $70,000 of the $75,000 verdict. Fifty thousand dollars of this amount, plus interest and costs, was paid by the defendant but it denies further liability on the ground the policy limit was $50,000 liability for one person in one accident. The policy in question was a fleet policy, and the Special Term held that .it was intended to cover each vehicle the same as though a separate policy had been issued therefor. It also held in effect that an ambiguity existed between the clause covering each vehicle and the clause limiting liability, and that such ambiguity should be resolved against the defendant insurance company. Order and judgment unanimously affirmed, with costs. Present — Foster, P. J., Heffernan, Brewster, Bergan and Coon, JJ.

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

Related

Auto-Owners Ins. Co. v. Anderson
756 So. 2d 29 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2000)
Suh v. Dennis
614 A.2d 1367 (New Jersey Superior Court App Division, 1992)
Carlino v. Lumbermens Mutual Casualty Co.
136 Misc. 2d 130 (New York Supreme Court, 1987)
Houser v. Gilbert
389 N.W.2d 626 (North Dakota Supreme Court, 1986)
Shamblin v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance
332 S.E.2d 639 (West Virginia Supreme Court, 1985)
Inman v. Hartford Insurance Group
346 N.W.2d 885 (Michigan Court of Appeals, 1984)
Commercial Standard Insurance v. Haley
282 F. Supp. 16 (S.D. Iowa, 1968)
Polland v. Allstate Insurance
25 A.D.2d 16 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1966)
Arthur A. Johnson Corp. v. Indemnity Insurance
6 A.D.2d 97 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1958)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
281 A.D. 735, 118 N.Y.S.2d 180, 1952 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 3375, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/loerzel-v-american-fidelity-fire-insurance-nyappdiv-1952.