S'Dao v. National Grange Mutual Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

S'Dao v. National Grange Mutual Insurance

207 A.D.2d 977, 616 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10166

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

DecidedSeptember 30, 1994

StatusPublished

This text of 207 A.D.2d 977 (S'Dao v. National Grange Mutual 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

S'Dao v. National Grange Mutual Insurance, 207 A.D.2d 977, 616 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10166 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff was injured in a two-car accident. She and four other injured persons reached a settlement with the two carriers insuring those vehicles. The bodily injury coverage of $50,000 per accident on one of the vehicles was exhausted, but the bodily injury coverage of $300,000 on the second vehicle was not. Because the bodily injury coverage on one of the two vehicles was not exhausted, plaintiff failed to satisfy the [978]*978statutory condition precedent to the recovery of underinsurance benefits, and the complaint should have been dismissed (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]; Matter of Federal Ins. Co. v Watnick, 80 NY2d 539, 546; Garcia v Mercado, 194 AD2d 334). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Plaintiff was injured in a two-car accident. She and four other injured persons reached a settlement with the two carriers insuring those vehicles. The bodily injury coverage of $50,000 per accident on one of the vehicles was exhausted, but the bodily injury coverage of $300,000 on the second vehicle was not. Because the bodily injury coverage on one of the two vehicles was not exhausted, plaintiff failed to satisfy the [978]*978statutory condition precedent to the recovery of underinsurance benefits, and the complaint should have been dismissed (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [f] [2]; Matter of Federal Ins. Co. v Watnick, 80 NY2d 539, 546; Garcia v Mercado, 194 AD2d 334). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Niagara County, Rath, Jr., J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Doerr and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

207 A.D.2d 977, 616 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 10166, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sdao-v-national-grange-mutual-insurance-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack