Terry v. Farmer's Insurance Co. of Arizona

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Terry v. Farmer's Insurance Co. of Arizona

236 A.D.2d 829, 653 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1760

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

DecidedFebruary 7, 1997

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 236 A.D.2d 829 (Terry v. Farmer's Insurance Co. of Arizona) 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

Terry v. Farmer's Insurance Co. of Arizona, 236 A.D.2d 829, 653 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1760 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff’s son, 14-year-old David Terry, II, was allegedly injured when he was struck by a snowmobile operated by defendant Craig Bolibruzck. Plaintiff commenced this action seeking judgment declaring that coverage for the injury to plaintiff’s son is provided by a homeowner’s policy issued by defendant Farmer’s Insurance Company of Arizona (Farmer’s) to Bolibruzck’s mother, defendant Peggy Wagner.

Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Farmer’s to dismiss the complaint. Because no personal injury action has been commenced to recover damages against defendants Bolibruzck and Wagner, the declaratory judgment action is premature (see, Allstate Ins. Co. v Hertz Corp., 119 AD2d 612, 613; Soto v MVAIC, 23 AD2d 728). Further, there is no basis for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Farmer’s, an Arizona corporation with its principal place of business in Phoenix, Arizona. Farmer’s is not authorized to do business in New York; has no office in New York; has no agents, employees or representatives in New York; and does not write policies for any type of insurance coverage in New York. The policy at issue was issued to Wagner, an Arizona resident, to cover her home in Tempe, Arizona. Thus, jurisdiction cannot be predi[830]*830cated upon Farmer’s transacting business or contracting to provide goods or services in this State (see, CPLR 302 [a] [1]; Wiesner v Stevens Hosp., 65 Misc 2d 102, 103-104). Further, the alleged breach of the insurance contract by Farmer’s does not constitute a tortious act and will not support the exercise of long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR 302 (a) (2) or (3) (see, Amigo Foods Corp. v Marine Midland Bank, 39 NY2d 391, 396; Pride Labs, v Athea Labs., 54 AD2d 976, 977). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mintz, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

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

—Order unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Plaintiff’s son, 14-year-old David Terry, II, was allegedly injured when he was struck by a snowmobile operated by defendant Craig Bolibruzck. Plaintiff commenced this action seeking judgment declaring that coverage for the injury to plaintiff’s son is provided by a homeowner’s policy issued by defendant Farmer’s Insurance Company of Arizona (Farmer’s) to Bolibruzck’s mother, defendant Peggy Wagner.

Supreme Court properly granted the motion of Farmer’s to dismiss the complaint. Because no personal injury action has been commenced to recover damages against defendants Bolibruzck and Wagner, the declaratory judgment action is premature (see, Allstate Ins. Co. v Hertz Corp., 119 AD2d 612, 613; Soto v MVAIC, 23 AD2d 728). Further, there is no basis for the exercise of personal jurisdiction over Farmer’s, an Arizona corporation with its principal place of business in Phoenix, Arizona. Farmer’s is not authorized to do business in New York; has no office in New York; has no agents, employees or representatives in New York; and does not write policies for any type of insurance coverage in New York. The policy at issue was issued to Wagner, an Arizona resident, to cover her home in Tempe, Arizona. Thus, jurisdiction cannot be predi[830]*830cated upon Farmer’s transacting business or contracting to provide goods or services in this State (see, CPLR 302 [a] [1]; Wiesner v Stevens Hosp., 65 Misc 2d 102, 103-104). Further, the alleged breach of the insurance contract by Farmer’s does not constitute a tortious act and will not support the exercise of long-arm jurisdiction under CPLR 302 (a) (2) or (3) (see, Amigo Foods Corp. v Marine Midland Bank, 39 NY2d 391, 396; Pride Labs, v Athea Labs., 54 AD2d 976, 977). (Appeal from Order of Supreme Court, Erie County, Mintz, J.—Declaratory Judgment.) Present—Green, J. P., Pine, Callahan, Balio and Boehm, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

236 A.D.2d 829, 653 N.Y.S.2d 767, 1997 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 1760, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/terry-v-farmers-insurance-co-of-arizona-nyappdiv-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack