From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Tucci v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1990
167 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Opinion

November 13, 1990

Appeal from the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (McCarthy, J.).


Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, with one bill of costs.

The plaintiff was issued a "Temporary New York State Insurance Card", or an "FS-21", by the Maloney Bindseil Agency, Inc., an authorized agent of the Hartford Casualty Insurance Company. Seven days after the issuance of the FS-21, the plaintiff was involved in a motor vehicle accident. Hartford denied coverage on the ground that it never received notice from its agent of the plaintiff's application, and that it did not have a policy in effect for the plaintiff. As a result, the plaintiff brought suit against the agent, Maloney Bindseil Agency, Inc., claiming that it had breached its contract and/or was negligent when it failed to have an insurance policy issued or delivered. In addition, the plaintiff brought an action against Hartford Casualty Insurance Company for a judgment declaring that it is required to defend and indemnify the plaintiff in an action brought against her to recover damages for personal injuries arising out of the automobile accident.

The defendant Maloney's motion to dismiss the complaint for failure to state a cause of action was properly denied. When an insurance agent undertakes to obtain a policy of insurance for a client, the agent may be held liable for neglect if it fails to procure such a policy (see, Spiegel v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 6 N.Y.2d 91). The fact that an agent acts for a disclosed principal does not relieve the agent of liability for its own negligent acts (see, Jones v. Archibald, 45 A.D.2d 532).

Further, since a principal must answer to an innocent third person for the misconduct of an agent acting within the scope of its authority, Hartford's motion for summary judgment was also properly denied (see, Ernst Iron Works v. Duralith Corp., 270 N.Y. 165; 3 N.Y. Jur 2d, Agency, §§ 239, 249). Bracken, J.P., Kunzeman, Kooper and Balletta, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Tucci v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Company

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Second Department
Nov 13, 1990
167 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)
Case details for

Tucci v. Hartford Casualty Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:MARY F. TUCCI, Respondent, v. HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY et al.…

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

Date published: Nov 13, 1990

Citations

167 A.D.2d 387 (N.Y. App. Div. 1990)

Citing Cases

Podesta v. Assumable Homes Development II Corp.

of action in the amended complaint, which alleged fraud and negligence, respectively, insofar as asserted…

Bedessee v. Hall

In opposition, CHH failed to raise a triable issue of fact. Its contention that it is not subject to…