§Why CasetextPricing

Gilbane Building Co./TDX Construction Corp., et al., Appellants,v.St. Paul Fire and Marine Insurance Company, et al., Defendants, Liberty Insurance Underwriters, Respondent.

Brief

20 Cited authorities

  1. White v. Continental Cas. Co.

    2007 N.Y. Slip Op. 9310 (N.Y. 2007)   Cited 383 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Holding if an insurance contract on its face is reasonably susceptible of only one meaning a court is not free to alter it

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

    46 N.Y.2d 351 (N.Y. 1978)   Cited 912 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"

  3. Brad H. v. City of New York et al

    17 N.Y.3d 180 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 187 times
    Noting that where a contract's language is "written so imperfectly that it is susceptible to more than one reasonable interpretation," it is deemed to be ambiguous.

  4. 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’ "

  5. State v. Home Indemnity Company

    66 N.Y.2d 669 (N.Y. 1985)   Cited 315 times
    Holding that the term-of-art affidavit in that case "did not supply the evidentiary facts needed to present an issue for the jury"

  6. Cragg v. Allstate Indemnity Corporation

    2011 N.Y. Slip Op. 4767 (N.Y. 2011)   Cited 122 times

    No. 118. Argued May 4, 2011. decided June 9, 2011. APPEAL, by permission of the Court of Appeals, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial Department, entered May 7, 2010. The Appellate Division affirmed a judgment (denominated order) of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Patrick H. NeMoyer, J.), which had granted defendant Allstate Indemnity Corporation's motion for summary judgment declaring that it had no obligation to defend or indemnify defendant insureds

  7. Ace Wire & Cable Co. v. Aetna Casualty & Surety Co.

    60 N.Y.2d 390 (N.Y. 1983)   Cited 236 times
    In Ace Wire this dishonest act coverage contained an exclusion for "loss... the proof of which, either as to its factual existence or as to its amount, is dependent upon an inventory computation or a profit and loss computation."

  8. Selective Ins. Co. of Am. v. Cnty. of Rensselaer

    2016 N.Y. Slip Op. 1001 (N.Y. 2016)   Cited 64 times   1 Legal Analyses

    No. 4. 02-11-2016 SELECTIVE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA et al., Respondents–Appellants, v. COUNTY OF RENSSELAER, Appellant–Respondent. Burke, Scolamiero, Mortati & Hurd, LLP, Albany (Melissa J. Smallacombe and Mark G. Mitchell of counsel), for appellant-respondent. Galbo & Associates, Buffalo (Richard A. Galbo and Leo C. Kellett of counsel), for respondents-appellants. ABDUS–SALAAM, J. Burke, Scolamiero, Mortati & Hurd, LLP, Albany (Melissa J. Smallacombe and Mark G. Mitchell of counsel), for appellant-respondent

  9. AB Green Gansevoort, LLC v. Peter Scalamandre & Sons, Inc.

    102 A.D.3d 425 (N.Y. App. Div. 2013)   Cited 66 times   3 Legal Analyses
    Interpreting similar language as requiring "a written agreement between the insured and the organization seeking coverage to add that organization as an additional insured"

  10. Fed. Ins. Co. v. Int'l Bus. Machines Corp.

    2012 N.Y. Slip Op. 1320 (N.Y. 2012)   Cited 67 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Explaining that a policy term will be considered ambiguous only where "there is a 'reasonable basis for a difference of opinion' as to the meaning of the policy" (quoting Greenfield, 780 N.E.2d at 170-71)

  11. Section 5501 - Scope of review

    N.Y. CPLR 5501   Cited 7,203 times   2 Legal Analyses
    Stating that the “shocks the conscience” standard “was relaxed in 1986 in tort actions, including the common personal injury and wrongful death actions in which additur and remittitur are most often seen”

  12. Section 500.13 - Content and form of briefs in normal course appeals

    N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 500.13

    (a) Content. All briefs shall conform to the requirements of section 500.1 of this Part and contain a table of contents, a table of cases and authorities, questions presented, point headings, and, if necessary, a disclosure statement pursuant to section 500.1(f) of this Part. Such disclosure statement shall be included before the table of contents in the party's principal brief. Appellant's brief shall include a statement showing that the court has jurisdiction to entertain the appeal and to review