T.R.V. Associates, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh, Pa.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

T.R.V. Associates, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh, Pa.

219 A.D.2d 546, 631 N.Y.S.2d 688, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9612

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

DecidedSeptember 26, 1995

StatusPublished

This text of 219 A.D.2d 546 (T.R.V. Associates, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh, Pa.) 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

T.R.V. Associates, Inc. v. National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh, Pa., 219 A.D.2d 546, 631 N.Y.S.2d 688, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9612 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

Opinion

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered September 26, 1994, which, inter alia, granted the motion of defendant National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh ("National”) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The evidence clearly demonstrates that Walter Kaye Associates was an insurance broker for plaintiff and not an insurance agent of defendant National. Accordingly, any negligence on the part of Walter Kaye in procuring insurance for plaintiff cannot be imputed to defendant National (see, Matco Prods. v Boston Old Colony Ins. Co., 104 AD2d 793, 796). Indeed, National has performed its obligations pursuant to the insurance policy in effect at the time of plaintiff’s loss. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.

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

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Helen Freedman, J.), entered September 26, 1994, which, inter alia, granted the motion of defendant National Union Fire Insurance of Pittsburgh ("National”) for summary judgment dismissing the complaint as against it, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

The evidence clearly demonstrates that Walter Kaye Associates was an insurance broker for plaintiff and not an insurance agent of defendant National. Accordingly, any negligence on the part of Walter Kaye in procuring insurance for plaintiff cannot be imputed to defendant National (see, Matco Prods. v Boston Old Colony Ins. Co., 104 AD2d 793, 796). Indeed, National has performed its obligations pursuant to the insurance policy in effect at the time of plaintiff’s loss. Concur— Sullivan, J. P., Ellerin, Kupferman, Ross and Tom, JJ.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

219 A.D.2d 546, 631 N.Y.S.2d 688, 1995 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 9612, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/trv-associates-inc-v-national-union-fire-insurance-of-pittsburgh-pa-nyappdiv-1995.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack