North River Insurance v. State Insurance Fund

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

North River Insurance v. State Insurance Fund

290 A.D.2d 362, 736 N.Y.S.2d 596, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 826

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

DecidedJanuary 29, 2002

StatusPublished

This text of 290 A.D.2d 362 (North River Insurance v. State Insurance Fund) 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

North River Insurance v. State Insurance Fund, 290 A.D.2d 362, 736 N.Y.S.2d 596, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 826 (N.Y. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered March 31, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff’s declaratory judgment action, unanimously modified, on the law, to declare that defendant State Insurance Fund is not obligated to reimburse plaintiff for any portion of the costs of defending or amounts paid in settlement of the underlying personal injury action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The trial court properly found that the owner and general contractor were additional insureds on the employer’s general liability policy obtained from plaintiff, and that, therefore, the third-party complaint by the owner and general contractor against the employer in the underlying action should have been dismissed as barred by the antisubrogation rule (see, North Star Reins. Corp. v Continental Ins. Co., 82 NY2d 281), notwithstanding the fact that the underlying declaratory judgment action, which sought to require plaintiff herein to assume the defense of the owner and general contractor, was discontinued due to settlement of the personal injury action. Accordingly, there would have existed no ground upon which plaintiff could have proceeded against defendant State Insurance Fund, the employer’s workers’ compensation carrier. We modify only to declare in defendant’s favor (see, Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

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

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Ira Gammerman, J.), entered March 31, 2000, which, after a nonjury trial, dismissed plaintiff’s declaratory judgment action, unanimously modified, on the law, to declare that defendant State Insurance Fund is not obligated to reimburse plaintiff for any portion of the costs of defending or amounts paid in settlement of the underlying personal injury action, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

The trial court properly found that the owner and general contractor were additional insureds on the employer’s general liability policy obtained from plaintiff, and that, therefore, the third-party complaint by the owner and general contractor against the employer in the underlying action should have been dismissed as barred by the antisubrogation rule (see, North Star Reins. Corp. v Continental Ins. Co., 82 NY2d 281), notwithstanding the fact that the underlying declaratory judgment action, which sought to require plaintiff herein to assume the defense of the owner and general contractor, was discontinued due to settlement of the personal injury action. Accordingly, there would have existed no ground upon which plaintiff could have proceeded against defendant State Insurance Fund, the employer’s workers’ compensation carrier. We modify only to declare in defendant’s favor (see, Lanza v Wagner, 11 NY2d 317, 334). Concur — Nardelli, J.P., Mazzarelli, Saxe, Ellerin and Buckley, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

290 A.D.2d 362, 736 N.Y.S.2d 596, 2002 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 826, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/north-river-insurance-v-state-insurance-fund-nyappdiv-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack