Mumuni v. Eagle Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Mumuni v. Eagle Insurance

247 A.D.2d 315, 668 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1609

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

DecidedFebruary 24, 1998

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 247 A.D.2d 315 (Mumuni v. Eagle 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

Mumuni v. Eagle Insurance, 247 A.D.2d 315, 668 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1609 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered January 23, 1997, which, in an action to determine insurance coverage, insofar as appealed from, declared that defendant-appellant’s policy was in effect at the time of the accident, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The accident occurred on December 31, 1988 at 9:00 a.m. Defendant-respondent’s policy with the insured expired as of 12:01 a.m. on December 31, 1988; defendant-appellant’s policy with the insured was effective “from 12/31/88 midnight to 12/ 31/89 midnight”. We agree with the IAS Court that the word “midnight” is ambiguous, and that the ambiguity should be construed against defendant-appellant so as to provide coverage as of the termination of defendant-respondent’s policy at 12:01 a.m. (see, Leatherby Ins. Co. v Villafana, 82 Misc 2d 144).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered January 23, 1997, which, in an action to determine insurance coverage, insofar as appealed from, declared that defendant-appellant’s policy was in effect at the time of the accident, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The accident occurred on December 31, 1988 at 9:00 a.m. Defendant-respondent’s policy with the insured expired as of 12:01 a.m. on December 31, 1988; defendant-appellant’s policy with the insured was effective “from 12/31/88 midnight to 12/ 31/89 midnight”. We agree with the IAS Court that the word “midnight” is ambiguous, and that the ambiguity should be construed against defendant-appellant so as to provide coverage as of the termination of defendant-respondent’s policy at 12:01 a.m. (see, Leatherby Ins. Co. v Villafana, 82 Misc 2d 144).

Concur — Milonas, J. P., Nardelli, Mazzarelli and Andrias, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

247 A.D.2d 315, 668 N.Y.S.2d 464, 1998 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1609, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mumuni-v-eagle-insurance-nyappdiv-1998.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack