Molot, Inc. v. Commonwealth Insurance

10 A.D.2d 683, 197 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11303
CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
DecidedMarch 15, 1960
StatusPublished
Cited by5 cases

This text of 10 A.D.2d 683 (Molot, Inc. v. Commonwealth 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
Molot, Inc. v. Commonwealth Insurance, 10 A.D.2d 683, 197 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11303 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1960).

Opinion

Judgment unanimously modified on the law to the extent of deleting the second, fourth and fifth decretal paragraphs and remanding the matter for a new trial only on the question of the amount of the damages to be awarded the plaintiff, with costs to the appellant. There having been no appeal taken by either party from that portion of the judgment which set aside the appraisal and award made under the terms of the insurance policy, it must be permitted to stand. However, the award with respect to damages must be set aside because there was no proper proof of damage. The actual cash value ” of the property at the time of the loss is the standard which must be used under the terms of the policy in order to determine the amount for which the defendants may be held liable. Replacement cost in and of itself is no proof of “ cash value ”. Nor is the cost of the furs sufficient to establish the actual “ cash value ” of the furs. In view of the fact that the merchandise damaged was retained and disposed of by the plaintiff, the amount for which the defendants may be held liable is the difference between the " actual cash value ” ¿f the property at the time just preceding the fire and the market value immediately after the fire. We have no proof as to either of these items. The price' obtained when the goods were sold at auction — some 15 months after the fire — does not represent the market value thereof immediately after the fire. Settle order. Appeal [from order denying plaintiff’s motion for new trial] dismissed, without costs. Settle order. Concur — Rabin, J. P., M. M. Frank, McNally, Stevens and Bastow, JJ.

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

Related

Esperance v. Royal Globe Insurance
134 Misc. 2d 718 (Civil Court of the City of New York, 1987)
Gumbs v. New York Property Insurance
114 A.D.2d 933 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1985)
Agostino v. Holyoke Mutual Insurance
89 A.D.2d 573 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1982)
Rodolitz Realty Corp. v. Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance
71 A.D.2d 975 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1979)
Incardona v. Home Indemnity Co.
60 A.D.2d 749 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1977)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
10 A.D.2d 683, 197 N.Y.S.2d 495, 1960 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 11303, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/molot-inc-v-commonwealth-insurance-nyappdiv-1960.