Home/Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York/Perrotta v. Empire Mutual Insurance

Perrotta v. Empire Mutual Insurance

62 Misc. 2d 925, 310 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1970 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1919
Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York·Decided February 4, 1970·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The finding of the trial court that plaintiff was an innocent purchaser for value of a stolen automobile is not questioned by defendant on this appeal. In the light of such finding, it is our opinion that plaintiff had an insurable interest in the automobile at the time it was stolen from him (Skaff v. United States Fid. & Guar. Co., 215 So. 2d 35 [Fla.]; Barnett v. London Assur. Corp., 138 Wash. 673; Norris v. Alliance Ins. Co. of Philadelphia, 1 N. J. Misc. 315). However, his recovery should be limited to the amount demanded in the complaint (see Michalowski v. Ey, 7 N Y 2d 71).

The judgment should be unanimously modified by reducing the amount of plaintiff’s recovery to $5,050, with interest and appropriate costs in the court below, and as so modified, affirmed with $25 costs to plaintiff.

•Concur — Margett, P. J., Rinaldi and Cone, JJ.

Judgment modified, etc.

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

Perrotta v. Empire Mutual Insurance, 62 Misc. 2d 925, 310 N.Y.S.2d 393, 1970 N.Y. Misc. LEXIS 1919 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1970).

62 Misc. 2d 925 (Perrotta v. Empire Mutual Insurance) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Scarola v. INS. CO. OF N. AMER.
292 N.E.2d 776 (New York Court of Appeals, 1972)
Scarola v. Insurance Co. of North America
292 N.E.2d 776 (New York Court of Appeals, 1972)
Scarola v. Insurance Co. of North America
67 Misc. 2d 437 (Appellate Terms of the Supreme Court of New York, 1971)