Sharlow v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sharlow v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

47 A.D.2d 572, 362 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8656

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

DecidedJanuary 9, 1975

StatusPublished

This text of 47 A.D.2d 572 (Sharlow v. Nationwide 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

Sharlow v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance, 47 A.D.2d 572, 362 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8656 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1975).

Pincite

Opinion

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered February 27, 1974 in St. Lawrence County, which granted a motion by plaintiff for summary judgment. The question presented for resolution on this appeal is whether, when a defendant seeks indemnification from a driver-spouse for injuries to a passenger-spouse upon the principles of Dole v. Dow Chem. Co. (30 N Y 2d 143), the exclusionary provision of subdivision 3 of section 167 of the Insurance Law applies so as to relieve the automobile insurance carrier of the driver-spouse from its responsibility to defend or pay such a claim. The Court of Appeals recently answered this question in the affirmative {State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Westlake, 35 N Y 2d 587, revg. 43 A D 2d 314). Accordingly, the order appealed from must be reversed. Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and judgment directed to be entered declaring that, pursuant to subdivision 3 of section 163 of the Insurance Law, defendant’s disclaimer was proper. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

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

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, entered February 27, 1974 in St. Lawrence County, which granted a motion by plaintiff for summary judgment. The question presented for resolution on this appeal is whether, when a defendant seeks indemnification from a driver-spouse for injuries to a passenger-spouse upon the principles of Dole v. Dow Chem. Co. (30 N Y 2d 143), the exclusionary provision of subdivision 3 of section 167 of the Insurance Law applies so as to relieve the automobile insurance carrier of the driver-spouse from its responsibility to defend or pay such a claim. The Court of Appeals recently answered this question in the affirmative {State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Westlake, 35 N Y 2d 587, revg. 43 A D 2d 314). Accordingly, the order appealed from must be reversed. Order reversed, on the law, without costs, and judgment directed to be entered declaring that, pursuant to subdivision 3 of section 163 of the Insurance Law, defendant’s disclaimer was proper. Herlihy, P. J., Sweeney, Kane, Main and Reynolds, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

47 A.D.2d 572, 362 N.Y.S.2d 618, 1975 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8656, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharlow-v-nationwide-mutual-insurance-nyappdiv-1975.