Sincerbeaux v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sincerbeaux v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance

206 A.D.2d 907, 614 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838

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

DecidedJuly 15, 1994

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 206 A.D.2d 907 (Sincerbeaux v. Nationwide Mutual Fire 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

Sincerbeaux v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance, 206 A.D.2d 907, 614 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court improperly granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this action seeking a declaration that defendant insurer must provide liability coverage to defendants Terry Snow and T.J. Snow under Terry Snow’s homeowner’s policy. Plaintiff is a stranger to the homeowner’s insurance policy and may not seek enforcement of the insurer’s obligation under it (see, Hershberger v Schwartz, 198 AD2d 859, 860; see also, Clarendon Place Corp. v Landmark Ins. Co., 182 AD2d 6, appeal dismissed 80 NY2d 918). Plaintiff’s remedy is a direct action against the insurer in the event that a judgment is rendered against the Snows and the judgment remains unsatisfied 30 days after entry (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [a] [2]; Hershberger v Schwartz, supra). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

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

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law without costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and complaint dismissed. Memorandum: Supreme Court improperly granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment in this action seeking a declaration that defendant insurer must provide liability coverage to defendants Terry Snow and T.J. Snow under Terry Snow’s homeowner’s policy. Plaintiff is a stranger to the homeowner’s insurance policy and may not seek enforcement of the insurer’s obligation under it (see, Hershberger v Schwartz, 198 AD2d 859, 860; see also, Clarendon Place Corp. v Landmark Ins. Co., 182 AD2d 6, appeal dismissed 80 NY2d 918). Plaintiff’s remedy is a direct action against the insurer in the event that a judgment is rendered against the Snows and the judgment remains unsatisfied 30 days after entry (see, Insurance Law § 3420 [a] [2]; Hershberger v Schwartz, supra). (Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Cayuga County, Corning, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Denman, P. J., Green, Balio, Wesley and Davis, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

206 A.D.2d 907, 614 N.Y.S.2d 836, 1994 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 7838, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sincerbeaux-v-nationwide-mutual-fire-insurance-nyappdiv-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack