LegalCaseDocs.com
shopping cart  
  |     
Search
 

 
New Visitors


 VeriSign Secure Site

 Get Adobe Reader

FEDERAL INS. CO. v RYDER TRUCK RENTAL Click to find out why . . .



Keywords & Phrases
CourtCode: AP, CourtName: NEW YORK COURT OF APPEALS, Plaintiff: FEDERAL INS. CO., State: NEW YORK, UniqueCaseRef: NE>AP>082_0909, Insurers, Mirage, Appellate Division, Memorandum, Apportionment, Primary Coverage, Judges, Insurance, Mirage Enterprises, York, Costs, Liability, Settlement, Excess, Pennsylvania, Moreover, Austin Powder, Ny2d, Bar Subrogation, Declaratory Judgment Action, Review, Submissions Pursuant, Chief Judge Kaye, Judges Simons, Bellacosa, Levine, Ciparick Concur, Judges Titone, Smith , ContentID: 120250561

Case Documents
1 1994-01-18 OPINION
[ see first page and extracted highlights below  ] ItemID: 124470
1 pages
HTML
Total Documents: 1 document , 1 page.    CAUTION.    PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS IS A ONE PAGE CASE.
Price: $ 19.95


IVESLCD01 KGI0001
 
 

 Forgot your password?


1 . OPINION

EXTRACTED KEY WORDS
MIRAGE
APPELLATE DIVISION
MEMORANDUM
APPORTIONMENT
PRIMARY COVERAGE
JUDGES
INSURANCE
MIRAGE ENTERPRISES
YORK
COSTS
LIABILITY
SETTLEMENT
EXCESS
COURT
PENNSYLVANIA
MOREOVER
AUSTIN POWDER
NY2D
BAR SUBROGATION
DECLARATORY JUDGMENT ACTION
REVIEW
SUBMISSIONS PURSUANT
CHIEF JUDGE KAYE
JUDGES SIMONS
BELLACOSA
LEVINE
CIPARICK CONCUR
JUDGES TITONE
SMITH


  FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND MIRAGE ENTERPRISES, INC. v. RYDER TRUCK RENTAL,
  INC., ET AL., THE AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY, ET AL., SUPERINTENDENT OF
  INSURANCE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, &C.,

    82 N.Y.2d 909, 631 N.E.2d 115, 609 N.Y.S.2d 173 (1994).
    January 18, 1994

   1 No. 120 SSM 32 (1994 NY Int. 003)
   Decided January 18, 1994
     _________________________________________________________________

   This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before
   publication in the New York Reports.

   MEMORANDUM:

   The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed, with costs,
   and the certified question answered in the affirmative.

   In this action primarily among insurers to apportion liability for a
   $1.75 million settlement in a personal injury action, we agree with
   the Appellate Division that the $1 million business auto policy issued
   to Mirage Enterprises provides excess coverage. Regardless of the
   finding below that the driver of the truck was a "special employee" of
   Mirage, the court correctly concluded that the vehicle was not owned,
   rented or used by Mirage, and thus did not trigger primary coverage
   under the policy. The $1 million policy issued to Ryder Truck Rental
   and the $500,000 policy issued to Erie Transfer Company, each
   providing primary coverage, apply in full to the settlement. The
   Appellate Division properly remitted the case to the trial court for
   apportionment of the remaining $250,000 among the excess insurers.

   We note, moreover, that while the Appellate Division properly applied
   Pennsylvania Gen. Ins. Co. v Austin Powder Co. (68 NY2d 465) to bar
   subrogation by insurers against their own insureds in this case, we do
   not pass upon the applicability of Pennsylvania General to a
   declaratory judgment action solely for apportionment of liability
   among insurers.

   On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order
   affirmed, with costs, and certified question answered in the
   affirmative, in a memorandum. Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons,
   Bellacosa, Levine and Ciparick concur. Judges Titone and Smith took no
   part.
SNIPPETS:
  • FEDERAL INSURANCE COMPANY AND MIRAGE ENTERPRISES, INC. v. RYDER TRUCK RENTAL,
  • This memorandum is uncorrected and subject to revision before publication in the New York
  • In this action primarily among insurers to apportion liability for a $1.75 million settlement
  • Regardless of the finding below that the driver of the truck was a "special employee" of
  • We note, moreover, that while the Appellate Division properly applied Pennsylvania Gen.
  • Co. v Austin Powder Co. (68 NY2d 465) to bar subrogation by insurers against their own
  • On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules, order affirmed, with costs,
  • Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Bellacosa, Levine and Ciparick concur.
  • Judges Titone and Smith took no part.
  •    |