§Why CasetextPricing

Karine Gevorkyan, et al., Appellants,v.Ira Judelson, Respondent.

Brief

47 Cited authorities

  1. Breed v. Ins. Co. of N. Amer

    46 N.Y.2d 351 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 911 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding that no ambiguity exists where language has "definite and precise meaning, unattended by danger of misconception in the purport of the policy itself, and concerning which there is no reasonable basis for a difference of opinion"

  2. Riley v. County of Broome

    95 N.Y.2d 455 (N.Y. 2000)   Cited 390 times
    Holding that the legislative history of Vehicle and Traffic Law § 1103 evinces an intent to impose “a minimum standard of care” on operators of vehicles engaged in roadwork

  3. Samiento v. World Yacht Inc.

    2008 N.Y. Slip Op. 1258 (N.Y. 2008)   Cited 281 times   12 Legal Analyses
    Affirming dismissal of the plaintiffs’ unjust enrichment claim because such an action does not lie where the plaintiffs have an adequate remedy at law

  4. DaimlerChrysler v. Spitzer

    7 N.Y.3d 653 (N.Y. 2006)   Cited 226 times
    In Spitzer, James Warner bought a new truck manufactured by General Motors Corporation in March 2003. Shortly after acquiring the truck, Warner discovered a transmission problem and attempted to have the problem fixed on five occasions between April and November 2003.

  5. Hartford Acc. Ind. v. Wesolowski

    33 N.Y.2d 169 (N.Y. 1973)   Cited 488 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding there was one "occurrence" under the event test when the insured vehicle struck one oncoming vehicle, ricocheted off, and struck a second vehicle more than 100 feet away and noting that there was "no intervening agent" and "in common understanding and parlance there was ... a single, inseparable ‘three-car accident’ "

  6. Chemical Specialties Manufacturers Ass'n v. Jorling

    85 N.Y.2d 382 (N.Y. 1995)   Cited 188 times
    Using executive memorandum and Governor's Message of Approval to interpret New York environmental protection statutes

  7. American Home Products v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co.

    748 F.2d 760 (2d Cir. 1984)   Cited 195 times
    Finding that property damage is physical injury occurring during the policy period

  8. American Home Assurance Co. v. International Ins. Co.

    90 N.Y.2d 433 (N.Y. 1997)   Cited 117 times
    Holding that because the plaintiff's arguments concerned "a pure question of law," "the doctrine of collateral estoppel does not preclude [the plaintiff] from litigating that issue again"

  9. Uniroyal, Inc. v. Home Ins. Co.

    707 F. Supp. 1368 (E.D.N.Y. 1988)   Cited 139 times
    Holding that coverage was triggered only at that point in time one week after each claimant was exposed to the toxic product

  10. Lavanant v. General Acc. Ins. Co.

    79 N.Y.2d 623 (N.Y. 1992)   Cited 107 times
    Holding that emotional distress was a “bodily injury” in an insurance policy

  11. Section 1332 - Diversity of citizenship; amount in controversy; costs

    28 U.S.C. § 1332   Cited 111,248 times   572 Legal Analyses
    Holding district court has jurisdiction over action between diverse citizens "where the matter in controversy exceeds the sum or value of $75,000"

  12. Section 1291 - Final decisions of district courts

    28 U.S.C. § 1291   Cited 88,713 times   138 Legal Analyses
    Granting jurisdiction to the courts of appeals from final decisions of federal district courts "except where a direct review may be had in the Supreme Court"

  13. Section 520.30 - Bail and bail bonds; examination as to sufficiency

    N.Y. Crim. Proc. Law § 520.30   Cited 57 times

    1. Following the posting of a bail bond and the justifying affidavit or affidavits or the posting of cash bail, the court may conduct an inquiry for the purpose of determining the reliability of the obligors or person posting cash bail, the value and sufficiency of any security offered, and whether any feature of the undertaking contravenes public policy; provided that before undertaking an inquiry, of a person posting cash bail the court, after application of the district attorney, must have had

  14. Section 1305 - Unearned premium reserves

    N.Y. Ins. Law § 1305

    (a) Every authorized insurer shall, except as to reserves required under section one thousand three hundred four of this article and subject to paragraph nine of subsection (a) of section one thousand three hundred one of this article and other specific provisions of this chapter, maintain reserves equal to the unearned portions of the gross premiums charged on unexpired or unterminated risks and policies. (b) (1) No deductions may be made from the gross premiums in force except for original premiums