From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Essex Ins. v. T-Birds Nightclub Restaurant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 12, 1996
229 A.D.2d 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)

Opinion

July 12, 1996

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J.

Present — Green, J.P., Pine, Fallon, Callahan and Davis, JJ.


Judgment unanimously affirmed without costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly directed plaintiff to defend T-Birds Nightclub Restaurant, Inc. (defendant), its insured, in the underlying personal injury action. "An insurer must defend whenever the four corners of the complaint suggest — or the insurer has actual knowledge of facts establishing — a reasonable possibility of coverage" ( Continental Cas. Co. v Rapid-American Corp., 80 N.Y.2d 640, 648). Where the allegations of the complaint fall within the scope of coverage, the insurer must defend "regardless of how false or groundless those allegations might be" ( Seaboard Sur. Co. v. Gillette Co., 64 N.Y.2d 304, 310; see also, Fitzpatrick v. American Honda Motor Co., 78 N.Y.2d 61, 63).

Here, the complaint in the underlying action alleges, inter alia, that Michael Abbotoy sustained injuries when Alan Polonkiewicz and other agents of defendant "negligently and carelessly escorted" him from the nightclub. The insurance policy issued to defendant excludes coverage for "claims arising out of Assault and Battery or out of any act or omission in connection with the prevention or suppression of such acts." Contrary to plaintiff's contention, that provision does not necessarily exclude coverage for the acts alleged by Abbotoy. The complaint does not allege that Abbotoy was assaulted while being escorted from the nightclub, nor does it allege that Abbotoy was escorted from the nightclub to prevent or suppress an assault or battery. Defendant's reliance on U.S. Underwriters Ins. Co. v. Val-Blue Corp. ( 85 N.Y.2d 821) is misplaced. In that case, it was undisputed that the injured person was intentionally assaulted by an employee of the nightclub, even though the allegations of the complaint in the underlying action sounded in negligence. Here, Abbotoy's injuries may have resulted from unintentional acts by agents of defendant. Because the complaint alleges a cause of action covered by the policy, plaintiff must provide its insured with a defense to the entire complaint ( see, Miano v. Hehn, 206 A.D.2d 957, 959).


Summaries of

Essex Ins. v. T-Birds Nightclub Restaurant

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Jul 12, 1996
229 A.D.2d 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
Case details for

Essex Ins. v. T-Birds Nightclub Restaurant

Case Details

Full title:ESSEX INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellant, v. T-BIRDS NIGHTCLUB RESTAURANT, INC.…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department

Date published: Jul 12, 1996

Citations

229 A.D.2d 919 (N.Y. App. Div. 1996)
645 N.Y.S.2d 218

Citing Cases

Mumford v. 854 Gerard Ave. Corp.

Depending on the circumstances leading up to plaintiff's contact with a sharp object, a stabbing might be an…

WSTC Corp. v. National Specialty Insurance Co.

While VIBE denies ever executing or agreeing to the Assault and Battery I Exclusion endorsement relied upon…