From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Yoda, LLC v. National Union Fire Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 22, 2008
50 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)

Opinion

No. 3447.

April 22, 2008.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Doris Ling-Cohan, J.), entered December 28, 2006, which denied defendant National Union Fire's motion to dismiss the complaint and granted plaintiffs' cross motion for summary judgment to the extent of declaring the insurer's disclaimer of coverage ineffective under Insurance Law § 3420 (d), unanimously modified, on the law, the cross motion denied, without prejudice to renewal after completion of discovery, and otherwise affirmed, without costs.

Sedgwick, Detert, Moran Arnold LLP, New York (Jeffrey M. Winn of counsel), for appellant.

Miranda Sokoloff Sambursky Slone Vervenoitis, LLP, Mineola (Michael A. Miranda of counsel), for respondents.

Before: Lippman, P.J., Saxe, Gonzalez and Nardelli, JJ.


Inasmuch as no discovery has been conducted in this matter, and contrary to the IAS court's observation, National Union did object to entertaining the motion for summary judgment, the court erred in ruling on it at this juncture ( see Primedia Inc. v SBI USA LLC, 43 AD3d 685; see also City of Rochester v Chiarella, 65 NY2d 92, 101). A judgment for Plaintiff's on the merits must at least await the filing of an answer.

National Union's motion to dismiss was properly denied, however, since there are questions concerning, for instance, the parties' intentions, the terms of the subcontract, and National Union's delay in disclaiming while monitoring the underlying Labor Law litigation, which preclude a determination as a matter of law that Yoda and Riverhead were not additional insureds, even in the absence of an explicit listing of their names on the umbrella policy ( see e.g. Queens Off. Tower Assoc. v General Mills Rest, 269 AD2d 223, 224).

National Union's reliance on the employers' liability exclusion in its policy is unavailing. The reason for this is that if Yoda and Riverhead are found to be additional insureds, the liability of National Union's insured (the nonparty subcontractor and employer of the injured worker) would be indirect ( see North Riv. Ins. Co. v United Natl. Ins. Co., 81 NY2d 812, 814).

[ See 14 Misc 3d 1201(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 523760(U).]


Summaries of

Yoda, LLC v. National Union Fire Insurance

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 22, 2008
50 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
Case details for

Yoda, LLC v. National Union Fire Insurance

Case Details

Full title:YODA, LLC, et al., Respondents, v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY…

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

Date published: Apr 22, 2008

Citations

50 A.D.3d 492 (N.Y. App. Div. 2008)
2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 3504
858 N.Y.S.2d 14

Citing Cases

YODA, LLC v. NATIONAL UNION FIRE INS. CO.

Id. at 160-161. This file indicates that there might be an exclusion based on the employer's negligence, but…

Yoda, LLC v. National Union Fire Insurance

Before: Tom, J.P., Saxe, Sweeny, Acosta and Adbus-Salaam, JJ. When ruling on National Union's first appeal to…