Summary
In Loring & Assoc. v Continental Cas. Co. (56 NY2d 848, 850 [1982]), the Court of Appeals held: "Inasmuch as the particular clause in question did not violate any statutory mandate or prohibition or any regulation of the Superintendent of Insurance, this court cannot say that the clause was violative of public policy."
Summary of this case from CHASE BANK v. New HampshireOpinion
Argued May 6, 1982
Decided June 8, 1982
Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, OLIVER C. SUTTON, J.
Thomas F. De Soye and John J. Connolly for appellant.
William H. Morris and Gerald P. McMorrow for respondent.
MEMORANDUM.
The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs, and the certified question answered in the affirmative.
Appellant contends that the reporting of a "potential claim" to the insurance carrier "locked" appellant into that carrier, inhibiting its freedom of contract because no other insurer would agree to cover the potential claim which was reported. It is appellant's contention that this "claims made" policy violated the public policy of this State. Inasmuch as the particular clause in question did not violate any statutory mandate or prohibition or any regulation of the Superintendent of Insurance, this court cannot say that the clause was violative of public policy. Any other substantive issues will be resolved at the trial.
Chief Judge COOKE and Judges JASEN, GABRIELLI, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG and MEYER concur in memorandum.
Order affirmed, etc.