National Union Fire Insurance v. Jay Tee Equities Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

National Union Fire Insurance v. Jay Tee Equities Co.

216 A.D.2d 546, 628 N.Y.S.2d 765, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7585

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

DecidedJune 26, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 216 A.D.2d 546 (National Union Fire Insurance v. Jay Tee Equities Co.) 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

National Union Fire Insurance v. Jay Tee Equities Co., 216 A.D.2d 546, 628 N.Y.S.2d 765, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7585 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), dated May 23, 1994, which upon granting the plaintiff s motion for summary judgment and denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the principal sum of $25,000.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the insurance policy [547]*547in question explicitly provides that the plaintiff may "make such investigation and settlement of any claim or suit as it deems expedient.” Thus, the plaintiff’s settlement of the underlying personal injury action without the defendant’s knowledge or consent was in accordance with the terms of the insurance policy (see, Feliberty v Damon, 72 NY2d 112, 116).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., O’Brien, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

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

In an action to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order and judgment (one paper) of the Supreme Court, Rockland County (Meehan, J.), dated May 23, 1994, which upon granting the plaintiff s motion for summary judgment and denying the defendant’s motion for summary judgment, is in favor of the plaintiff and against the defendant in the principal sum of $25,000.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the insurance policy [547]*547in question explicitly provides that the plaintiff may "make such investigation and settlement of any claim or suit as it deems expedient.” Thus, the plaintiff’s settlement of the underlying personal injury action without the defendant’s knowledge or consent was in accordance with the terms of the insurance policy (see, Feliberty v Damon, 72 NY2d 112, 116).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are without merit. Sullivan, J. P., O’Brien, Altman and Goldstein, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

216 A.D.2d 546, 628 N.Y.S.2d 765, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7585, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/national-union-fire-insurance-v-jay-tee-equities-co-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack