Sinn v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Sinn v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance

245 A.D.2d 1096, 666 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884

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

DecidedDecember 31, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 245 A.D.2d 1096 (Sinn 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

Sinn v. Nationwide Mutual Insurance, 245 A.D.2d 1096, 666 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order and judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: We agree with defendant that Supreme Court erred in awarding plaintiffs interest on the entire award of damages. The insurance policy at issue is not more generous than that required by regulation, and thus defendant must pay interest only on the limit of the insurance policy, not on the entire award of damages (see, 11 NYCRR 60-1.1 [b]; Dingle v Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 85 NY2d 657, 660-661). The court, however, properly directed that interest be calculated from the date on which the order of default was entered, because that order established defendant’s liability (see, Love v State of New York, 78 NY2d 540). We therefore modify the order and judgment by awarding plaintiffs interest only on the $50,000 policy limit. (Appeals from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Cornelius, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

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

—Order and judgment unanimously modified on the law and as modified affirmed without costs in accordance with the following Memorandum: We agree with defendant that Supreme Court erred in awarding plaintiffs interest on the entire award of damages. The insurance policy at issue is not more generous than that required by regulation, and thus defendant must pay interest only on the limit of the insurance policy, not on the entire award of damages (see, 11 NYCRR 60-1.1 [b]; Dingle v Prudential Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co., 85 NY2d 657, 660-661). The court, however, properly directed that interest be calculated from the date on which the order of default was entered, because that order established defendant’s liability (see, Love v State of New York, 78 NY2d 540). We therefore modify the order and judgment by awarding plaintiffs interest only on the $50,000 policy limit. (Appeals from Order and Judgment of Supreme Court, Ontario County, Cornelius, J.—Summary Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Hayes, Callahan and Fallon, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

245 A.D.2d 1096, 666 N.Y.S.2d 89, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 13884, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sinn-v-nationwide-mutual-insurance-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack