Malenzi v. Royal-Globe Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Malenzi v. Royal-Globe Insurance

63 A.D.2d 645, 404 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11511

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

DecidedMay 1, 1978

StatusPublished

This text of 63 A.D.2d 645 (Malenzi v. Royal-Globe 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

Malenzi v. Royal-Globe Insurance, 63 A.D.2d 645, 404 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11511 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to declare that defendant is obligated to appear for and defend plaintiff, its insured, in certain negligence actions, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered October 11, 1977, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated November 3, 1977, which, inter alia, directed that it (a) defend plaintiff in the negligence actions and (b) pay any judgment recovered against plaintiff to the limit of the policy. Judgment and order reversed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals, and motion for summary judgment denied. There are several substantial issues of fact, inter alia, whether defendant-appellant assumed coverage and whether it effectively disclaimed such coverage, which preclude a summary disposition of this case. Martuscello, J. P., Latham, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to declare that defendant is obligated to appear for and defend plaintiff, its insured, in certain negligence actions, the defendant appeals from (1) an order of the Supreme Court, Orange County, entered October 11, 1977, which granted the plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment and (2) a judgment of the same court, dated November 3, 1977, which, inter alia, directed that it (a) defend plaintiff in the negligence actions and (b) pay any judgment recovered against plaintiff to the limit of the policy. Judgment and order reversed, with one bill of $50 costs and disbursements to cover both appeals, and motion for summary judgment denied. There are several substantial issues of fact, inter alia, whether defendant-appellant assumed coverage and whether it effectively disclaimed such coverage, which preclude a summary disposition of this case. Martuscello, J. P., Latham, Damiani and Rabin, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

63 A.D.2d 645, 404 N.Y.S.2d 377, 1978 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11511, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/malenzi-v-royal-globe-insurance-nyappdiv-1978.