From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Canastraro v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1998
256 A.D.2d 1161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)

Opinion

December 31, 1998

Appeal from Judgment of Supreme Court, Erie County, Notaro, J. — Declaratory Judgment.


Judgment unanimously affirmed with costs. Memorandum: Supreme Court properly granted plaintiffs' cross motion for summary judgment and declared that the additional personal injury protection (PIP) coverage provided by the policy issued by defendant is applicable to the claim of plaintiff Yvette Canastraro for additional PIP benefits. The definition of extended economic loss set forth in the PIP endorsement is vague because it fails to indicate whether the descriptions contained in paragraphs (a) and (b) should be read conjunctively or disjunctively. Those descriptions therefore must be given a construction most favorable to the insured ( see, Randolph v. Nationwide Mist. Fire Ins. Co., 242 A.D.2d 889; Mero v. Foster, 206 A.D.2d 947, 948) and thus should be read in the disjunctive. Paragraph (b) describes extended economic loss as "the difference between (i) basic economic loss; and (ii) basic economic loss recomputed in accordance with the time and dollar limits set out in the schedule." The schedule, however, also is vague because it does not refer to basic economic loss; it contains only what appears on its face to be a computation of extended economic loss, not a recomputation of basic economic loss. Under the circumstances, the additional PIP coverage endorsement, read in the light most favorable to the insured, provides extended economic loss benefits to the maximum of $50,000.

Present — Denman, P. J., Green, Hayes, Balio and Boehm, JJ.


Summaries of

Canastraro v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Department
Dec 31, 1998
256 A.D.2d 1161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
Case details for

Canastraro v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:YVETTE CANASTRARO et al., Respondents, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE…

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

Date published: Dec 31, 1998

Citations

256 A.D.2d 1161 (N.Y. App. Div. 1998)
684 N.Y.S.2d 103

Citing Cases

Mack v. State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co.

Memorandum: We affirm for reasons stated in the decision at Supreme Court. We add only that revisions in…

Canastraro v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Decided May 4, 1999 Appeal from (4th Dept: 256 A.D.2d 1161). Motion for leave to appeal granted or…